BX  S  . S  6  7 

S  oderblom,  Nathan,  1866- 
1931  . 

Christian  fellowship 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


https://archive.org/details/christianfeilowsOOsode 


CHBISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


THE  CHRISTIAN  UNITY 
HANDBOOK  SERIES 


Edited  by  Peter  Ainslie,  D.D. 


ANNOUNCEMENT 

Never  was  the  call  of  unity  so  urgent  upon 
the  conscience  of  Christians  as  in  these  times. 
It  is  the  struggle  of  the  twentieth  century.  It 
is  both  a  necessity  and  a  possibility.  The  Chris¬ 
tian  Unity  Handbook  Series  is  the  first  Ameri¬ 
can  attempt  to  get  together  a  series  of  books 
dealing  with  Christian  unity.  The  authors  are 
from  various  communions  and  of  various  na¬ 
tionalities.  The  first  in  the  series  is 

“IF  NOT  A  UNITED  CHURCH — WHAT  ?” 

BY  PETER  AINSLIE 

This  volume  is  now  in  its  second  edition.  The 
second  in  this  series  is  the  present  volume  on 

“CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP/’ 

BY  THE  ARCHBISHOP  OF  UPSALA 

Other  volumes  are  in  course  of  preparation. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  UNITY  HANDBOOK  SERIES 


Christian  Fellowship 

OR 

THE  UNITED  LIFE  AND  WORK 
OF  CHRISTENDOM 


BY 

NATHAN  SODERBLOM 

ARCHBISHOP  OF  UPSALA 

PROCHANCELLOR  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  UPSALA 
SOMETIME  PROFESSOR  OF  THE  HISTORY  OF  RELIGION  IN  THE 
UNIVERSITIES  OF  UPSALA  AND  LEIPZIG 

Author  of  “La  Vie  Future  d’Apres  le  Mazdeisme,”  etc. 


New  York  Chicago 

Fleming  H.  Revell  Company 

London 


and  Edinburgh 


Copyright,  1923,  by 
FLEMING  H.  REVELL  COMPANY 


Printed  in  the  United  States  of  America 


New  York:  158  Fifth  Avenue 
Chicago:  17  North  Wabash  Ave. 
London:  21  Paternoster  Square 
Edinburgh:  75  Princes  Street 


CONTENTS 


I.  The  Unity  of  Christendom 

Duty  or  Problem. 

“We  Know  in  Part.” 

II.  The  Divisions  op  Christendom  . 

Those  WTio  Were  Put  Out. 

Those  Who  Went  Out. 

III.  The  Divisions  of  Christendom  ( Cont .)  . 

The  Nations  as  Keligious  Units. 

The  Effects  of  War  on  Church  Unity. 

IY.  Ways  to  Unity . 

The  Method  of  Absorption. 

The  Method  of  Faith. 

The  Method  of  Love. 

V.  A  Brief  Survey  of  Some  of  the  Efforts 
Already  Made  ...... 

YI.  Immediate  Aims  ...... 


PAGE 

9 

37 

81 

115 

183 

203 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


I 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 

DUTY  OR  PROBLEM 

WHO  dares  write  of  Christian  unity,  on  our 
belief  in  unam  sanctam  cafholicam  et  apos- 
tolicam  ecclesiam,  on  its  reality,  on  its 
pangs  and  needs,  without  plunging  himself  and  all 
those  who  will  read  such  a  bold  essay  into  the  prayer 
recorded  in  the  seventeenth  chapter  of  St.  John?  Let 
us  humbly  and  obediently  penetrate  our  souls  with 
its  words  and  spirit :  ‘  ‘  That  they  may  all  be  one ;  even 
as  Thou,  Father,  art  in  Me,  and  I  in  Thee,  that  they 
also  may  be  in  Us:  that  the  world  may  believe  that 
Thou  didst  send  Me.”  This  prayer  of  our  Saviour, 
so  often  repeated  by  us,  but  never  pondered  seriously 
enough,  contains  three  clauses:  First,  the  disciples  of 
Christ  shall  be  one;  secondly,  where  they  are  to  be 
united — in  the  Father  and  Son ;  thirdly,  why  they  are 
to  be  united — that  the  world  may  believe  that  God 
has  sent  Christ. 


Unity  Necessary 

Are  not  these  divine  petitions,  as  it  were,  so  many 
accusations  directed  against  ourselves  and  the  entire 
Christendom  of  our  day?  Jesus  prays  that  His  dis¬ 
ciples  may  be  one.  Moreover,  it  is  said  of  them  in 

9 


10 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Acts  2:44  that  “all  that  believed  were  together.’ 9 
The  heathen  said,  “See,  how  they  love  one  another.” 
What  does  the  world  say  now  when  it  sees  the  dis¬ 
ciples  of  Jesus?  “See,  how  often  they  suspect  and 
misinterpret  one  another.”  What  Dr.  Arthur  C. 
Headlam,  in  his  book  on  ‘  ‘  The  Doctrine  of  the  Church 
and  Christian  Reunion,”  has  recently  written  is  quite 
true,  that  the  sections  of  Christendom  are  wrongly 
called  Churches,  for  they  do  not  serve  the  cause  of 
unity.  They  do  not  gather  together.  They  are,  in¬ 
deed,  marks  of  separation.  Instead  of  Churches  they 
ought  to  be  called  schisms.  The  world  says,  “See, 
how  those  Christians  oppose  one  another.”  See,  how 
they  compete  with  one  another  at  home  and  abroad, 
instead  of  uniting  in  loving  co-operation.  The  united 
Life  and  Work  of  the  Church  of  Christ  is  more  needed 
in  our  day  than  ever  before. 

The  Christian’s  strife  never  ceases.  Jesus  exhorts 
us  to  watch  and  pray.  The  evil,  the  lovelessness,  and 
the  disunion  are  nearest  and  most  dangerous  foes. 
Each  one  must  fight  that  fight  by  himself  with  the 
help  of  God  and  the  help  of  Christ.  The  prayers  and 
the  example  of  others,  together  with  the  strength  pro¬ 
ducing  love  in  their  souls,  are  also  helpful.  But  self¬ 
ishness,  lust  and  untruth  lord  it  mightily  in  the 
world.  The  campaign  against  them  must,  therefore, 
be  conducted  with  united  forces.  Divided,  we  are 
pitiably  weak.  United,  we  should  be  stronger.  Not 
seldom  the  cause  of  Christ  is  forwarded  in  jerks  by 
one  person  or  another,  one  communion  or  another. 
Instead  of  this,  Christians  must  unite  their  forces 
and  march  forward  patiently  and  irresistibly  behind 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


11 


the  Master  with  closed  ranks.  The  whole  present 
world  situation,  as  well  as  new  special  problems  aris¬ 
ing  every  month,  nay,  every  week,  in  some  part  of  the 
Church,  intensify  the  need,  that  all  communions  of 
Christendom  should  possess  an  organ  for  common 
action  in  word  and  deed,  an  effective  expression  of 
our  fellowship  around  the  Cross  of  Christ,  helping  us 
to  serve  our  common  Lord  with  strengthened  hands. 

The  Place  of  TJnity 

Where  are  the  Christians  to  be  united?  Jesus 
speaks  of  a  far  deeper  unity  than  is  implied  by  any 
joint  action  for  the  purpose  of  common  service  in  His 
cause.  He  speaks  of  a  spiritual  fellowship.  This 
exists  already.  No  organization  can  create  it  where 
it  does  not  exist.  And  where  it  exists  it  is  worth 
more  than  any  organization.  Our  eyes  see  the  dis¬ 
union,  the  many  confessions,  the  many  forms  of  rit¬ 
ual,  the  many  differences.  But  our  faith  sees  the 
unity,  the  One,  Only,  Holy,  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church,  a  temple  not  built  by  human  hands,  but 
erected  by  God  Himself  on  the  foundation  of  the 
Apostles  and  Prophets,  whose  corner-stone  is  the  Lord 
Jesus  Himself  (Eph.  2:  20-22). 

This  temple  is  thus  nothing  less  than  a  dwelling 
for  God  Himself.  It  reaches  from  earth  up  into  the 
highest  heaven.  Of  what  material  is  it  erected?  All 
sincere  souls  in  all  Christian  congregations  are  living 
stones  in  the  Lord’s  house.  Praying  and  loving 
hearts — those  who  have  fallen  asleep  as  well  as  those 
yet  living — form  that  house  of  God  which  is  the  true 
Church.  Consequently  the  unity  of  the  disciples  of 


12 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Christ  does  not  coincide  with  any  existing  body  or 
communion  in  Christendom,  neither  the  largest  nor 
the  smallest,  and  least  of  all  with  any  body,  great  or 
small,  which  in  a  sectarian  spirit  separates  itself  from 
others.  We  are  brought  together  by  the  aching  sense 
of  separation  and  we  meet  united  wills  that  are  zealous 
for  the  holy  name  of  God.  No  organization  can  be 
equivalent  to  the  true  Church  of  Christ.  Only  faith, 
which  sees  the  invisible  with  the  unclouded  eye  of 
truth,  is  aware  that  it  belongs  to  the  one  flock  which 
Christ  has  redeemed  and  which  one  day  shall  be 
assembled  from  all  peoples  and  nations. 

To  be  sure,  that  unity  of  Christians  is  not  without 
witness.  It  is  seen,  first  and  foremost,  in  deeds  of 
love — in  the  abandonment  to  love,  in  its  forgetfulness 
of  self,  in  its  patience  and  self-sacrifice.  Further¬ 
more,  our  Christian  unity  is  visible  in  our  common 
recognition  of  the  same  Holy  Scriptures,  in  faith  and 
in  prayer — above  all,  in  the  Lord’s  Prayer  and  in  the 
Holy  Sacraments.  The  one  body  and  the  one  Spirit 
(Eph.  4 :  4),  in  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  are  found  every¬ 
where,  in  all  lands. 

Short-sighted  eyes  see  only  the  differences.  Dis¬ 
tance  teaches  us  a  useful  lesson.  In  the  cathedral 
close  to  my  window,  beside  the  relics  of  the  beloved 
king  and  patron  saint  of  Sweden,  St.  Eric,  men  are 
buried  who  considered  veneration  of  saints  a  dan¬ 
gerous  thing.  Mediaeval  prelates,  until  Archbishop 
Jacob  Ulfson  and  others,  who  considered  the  begin¬ 
ning  of  the  Reformation  the  ruin  of  religion,  repose 
there  peacefully  with  King  Gustaf  Vasa,  who 
adopted  the  Reformation  for  the  realm,  and  likewise 


THE  UNITY  OP  CHRISTENDOM 


13 


his  great  Archbishop  Laurentius  Petri,  our  Church 
Father,  who  devoted  a  long  life  in  introducing  the 
evangelic 1  spirit  into  the  Church  and  nation.  King 
John  III,  the  learned  Erasmian  believer,  his  gentle 
Roman  Catholic,  Polish  queen,  and  Emanuel  Sweden¬ 
borg,  the  revealer  of  a  new  dispensation,  have  found 
their  last  dwelling-place  with  the  sturdy  Lutheran 
prelates  who  thundered  against  them  from  the  pulpit 
of  the  cathedral. 

The  dead  rest  in  many  great  sanctuaries  in  mute 
protest  against  exclusiveness.  In  Westminster  Abbey 
sleep  cardinals  and  Puritans.  There  “lie  Mary 
Tudor  and  imperious  Elizabeth,  Margaret  Beaufort, 
patroness  of  learning,  and  CromwelPs  daughter. 
Here  lay  the  great  Protector  himself  till  in  ‘mean 
revenge’  his  corpse  was  disinterred.  Here  were  buried 
High  Church  and  Low  Church  divines.  Here  is  a 
tablet  to  John  Wesley  and  a  memorial  to  the  great 
Nonconformist  hymn-writer,  Isaac  Watts.  Here  we 
cannot  renew  old  disputes  or  continue  ancient  ani¬ 
mosities.  In  Church  there  must  be  forgiveness  and 
peace.”  2 

Many  of  those  dead  are  not  mute.  They  still  speak 
to  us  to-day  but  without  controversy.  In  the  hymn- 
book  Jewish  and  Christian,  the  ancient,  mediaeval, 
and  modern  Church,  Greeks,  Roman  Catholics  and 

1  The  word  “Evangelic”  is  used  in  this  volume  because  some 
of  the  foremost  thinkers  and  writers  in  Europe  have  recently 
adopted  it  for  the  special  purpose  of  distinguishing  in  the 
Church  its  three  main  sections — the  Orthodox  Catholic,  the 
Roman  Catholic,  and  the  Evangelic  Catholic. — Editor. 

2  E.  W.  Barnes. 


14 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Evangelics,  mystics,  orthodox  and  pietists,  monks 
and  patriarchs,  troublesome  witnesses  to  the  truth, 
burnt  heretics  and  solid  Churchmen,  outcasts  and 
ornaments  of  society,  praise  and  pray  in  one  single 
harmonious  choir,  specimens  as  it  were  of  the  host 
who  sing  a  new  song  before  the  throne.  Forgetting 
their  disputes  in  life,  our  hearts  find  expression  dur¬ 
ing  the  same  service  in  the  hymns  of  those  who  once 
stood  against  each  other. 

The  devotional  literature  of  the  Church  often  re¬ 
veals  religion  purer  and  richer  than  theology.  We 
enjoy  Erasmus  and  Sebastian  Frank  as  well  as  Luther, 
Tersteegen  as  well  as  Bengel.  John  Bunyan  impris¬ 
oned  in  Bedford  gaol  wrote  “The  Pilgrim’s  Prog¬ 
ress,”  second  only  to  the  Bible  in  circulation — but 
we  are  indebted  also  to  Lancelot  Andrewes  and  to 
Jeremy  Taylor  for  guidance  in  holiness.  St.  Augus¬ 
tine’s  “Confessions,”  “The  Imitation  of  Christ,” 
and  the  “Theologia  Germanica,”  “The  Pilgrim’s 
Progress,”  and  “The  Serious  Call,”  George  Herbert 
and  John  Keble — are  common  property  to  all  Anglo- 
Saxon  denominations.  The  whole  literature  of  mys¬ 
ticism,  which  means  prayer  in  its  widest  sense,  trans¬ 
ports  us  into  a  religion  where  differences  of  time, 
place,  language  and  cult  count  for  hardly  anything. 
The  task  of  reunion  is  not  to  stitch  together  a  patch- 
work  quilt,  but  only  to  repair  a  coat  which  has  burst 
at  the  seams.1 

We  ought  not,  therefore,  to  say  the  Church  of  Eng¬ 
land,  the  Church  of  France,  the  Church  of  Sweden, 
nor  the  Anglican,  the  Lutheran,  the  Wesleyan,  the 

i  W.  R.  Inge. 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


15 


Roman,  the  Greek  Church,  as  if  there  were  several 
Churches.  We  ought  rather  to  say  the  Church  in 
England,  in  Germany,  in  Sweden,  in  Rome,  just  as 
the  New  Testament  speaks  of  the  Church  in  Jerusa¬ 
lem,  in  Corinth,  in  Smyrna,  in  Philadelphia.  And 
while  by  this  we  must  imply  all  true  believers  in  that 
place,  we  still  look  toward  the  time  when  they  shall 
be  more  visibly  one. 

The  Johannine  mysticism  says  of  the  Father  and 
the  Son,  “Even  as  Thou,  Father,  art  in  Me,  and  I  in 
Thee,  that  they  also  may  be  in  Us.”  So  intimately 
was  Jesus  united  to  His  heavenly  Father.  He  cannot 
put  Himself  beside  His  Father  as  has  been  done  in 
Christian  imagination  and  art.  The  Father  was  in 
Him.  Whoever  saw  Jesus,  saw  the  Father.  Jesus 
lived  His  life  with  God,  in  God.  Just  as  intimately 
does  Jesus  desire  to  unite  His  disciples  in  the  Father 
and  Himself.  Those  who  live  in  God  are  one.  They 
all  are  one,  just  as  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  one. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  there  is  in  our  time  much 
activity  and  zeal  for  religion.  Many  faithful  hearts 
are  eagerly  and  self-sacrificingly  at  work  to  alleviate 
the  great  distress  caused  by  the  war  and  to  uphold 
the  work  of  Christian  charity  and  missions.  The 
modes  of  expressing  the  unsearchable  secret  of  salva¬ 
tion,  the  mutual  relations  of  the  peoples,  the  social  and 
economic  situation  of  society — in  all  these  matters  the 
counsel  of  God  is  seriously  sought. 

But  what  of  the  soul ’s  life  in  God  ?  How  many  live 
their  life  in  God?  How  many  give  themselves  time  to 
listen  to  the  still  voice  which  here  prays  for  His  own? 
In  God  the  soul  is  tried,  subjected  to  a  searchlight  so 


16 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


that  nothing  can  be  hidden.  In  God  the  soul  is 
cleansed  and  renewed.  It  is  saturated  with  the  grace 
of  God.  From  eternity  the  Son  had  felt  the  tender 
beating  of  the  Father’s  heart.  The  same  infinite  love 
meets  us  when  we  commune  with  the  Lord.  It  is  with 
Him  as  with  other  friends.  The  more  we  are  with 
Him,  the  better  do  we  get  to  know  Him.  Oh,  the  awe ! 
Oh,  the  bliss  of  life  in  God !  Thus  where  are  we  to  be 
united  ?  Meeting-places  might  be  mentioned — the 
church,  the  chapel,  Christian  work,  common  en¬ 
deavours  and  organizations,  Christian  thought,  agree¬ 
ment  in  Faith  and  Order,  in  Life  and  Work.  But 
Jesus  names  here  the  only  meeting-place  which  can 
really  unite  us  as  His  disciples.  We  are  to  meet  in 
God  and  Christ.  ‘  ‘  In  the  purely  religious  sphere  there 
has  been  no  schism.  No  form  of  Christian  piety  has 
separated  itself  from  Christ;  and  therefore,  there  is 
nowhere  any  real  obstacle  to  prevent  Christians  from 
returning  through  their  fellowship  with  Christ  to  fel¬ 
lowship  with  each  other.  The  unity  of  Christendom 
is  unity  in  Christ,  the  unity  of  members  with  their 
Head;  and  this  unity  has  never  been  broken  for  any 
who  Gove  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  uncorruptness.’  5,1 

Reason  for  Unity 

Why  are  we  to  meet  and  to  be  made  one?  The 
Lord’s  answer  is,  “that  the  world  may  believe  that 
Thou  hast  sent  Me.”  Union  in  Life  and  Work,  in 
Faith  and  Order,  in  Spirit  and  Truth,  is  hard  to  at¬ 
tain.  Is  it  not  easier  to  let  the  old  order  continue 
with  its  weakness  and  division?  When  the  Lord 

i  W.  R.  Inge. 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


17 


comes,  we  can  say  to  Him,  “We  knew  that  Thou  art 
an  austere  Master.  Every  communion  has  its  own 
particular  talents,  one  having  more,  the  other  less. 
Each  one  of  us  has  looked  well  to  his  own  talents, 
but  we  found  it  quite  too  risky  to  venture  on  a  com¬ 
mon  management  of  the  gifts  Thou  has  given  us.” 
It  is  our  curse  that  we  so  easily  accustom  ourselves 
to  what  is  wrong.  Absurdities  which  cry  aloud  for 
improvement  are  left  undisturbed,  with  the  explana¬ 
tion,  “It’s  a  pity,  but  it  has  always  been  so,  and  it 
can’t  be  otherwise.”  So  it  is  with  our  divisions.  We 
regret  them,  but  there  is  nothing  to  be  done,  men 
often  say.  It  was  part  of  the  strength  of  Christ  that 
He  never  accustomed  Himself  to  what  was  wrong,  but 
suffered  under  it  and  attacked  it,  however  ordinary, 
deep-rooted  or  self-evident  it  might  be.  Is  disunion 
among  Christians  really  a  crime  and  sin?  Is  union 
a  duty?  Is  not  union  rather  a  lovely  dream  to  which 
one  may,  of  course,  grant  one’s  approval?  It  is  a 
matter  for  consideration  and  discussion;  but  would 
it  not  be  wise  to  postpone  it  to  the  future?  Who  are 
those  troublesome  fellows  who  strive  for  unity?  Di¬ 
vision  is  the  normal  state.  It  is  always  disagreeable 
to  be  disturbed  in  one’s  habits. 

Why  are  the  disciples  to  be  one  in  the  Father  and 
the  Son?  The  answer  is,  that  the  world  may  believe 
that  God  did  send  Christ.  Why  did  Christ  come, 
speak,  suffer,  work  and  die  ?  So  that  the  world  might 
believe  that  God  did  send  Him.  By  our  divisions  we 
Christians  are  a  hindrance  to  our  Saviour  in  His  work 
of  salvation.  We  prevent  men  from  believing  in  Him. 
Christian  unity  is  imperatively  needed  that  the  world 


18 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


may  see  and  acknowledge  the  Lord.  Our  divisions 
crucify  Him  anew.  They  expose  Him  to  derision  and 
contempt.  Our  divisions  are  not  merely  a  drawback: 
they  are  a  crime.  Unity  is  not  only  a  beautiful  idea. 
It  is  Christ’s  plain  commandment  and  our  uncondi¬ 
tional  duty.  When  you  once  perceive  this,  your  con¬ 
science  can  never  more  be  reconciled  to  division.  The 
lack  of  unity  will  burn  you  like  fire.  The  desire  for 
unity  is  not  a  fashion,  a  phenomenon  of  the  time,  nor 
a  pious  wish  whereby  men  seek  to  conceal  from  them¬ 
selves  and  others  the  hard  reality,  the  cleft  which  his¬ 
tory  and  the  world  crisis  of  our  time  have  driven 
between  men.  No,  unity  is  a  sacred  obligation.  The 
way  to  it  is  long  and  steep  and  stony.  It  leads 
through  many  hardships,  great  and  small.  Each  one 
of  these  by  itself  seems  impossible  to  overcome.  But 
faith  overcomes  all  hindrances  if  only  we  are  gen¬ 
uinely  penitent — if  we  are  aware  of  our  guilt  and  ask 
forgiveness  for  our  omissions,  which  the  Saviour 
judges  with  still  greater  severity  than  our  offences. 
As  it  is  rightly  said  in  the  general  confession  of  the 
Anglican  ritual,  first,  4 ‘We  have  left  undone  those 
things  which  we  ought  to  have  done,”  and  then,  “We 
have  done  those  things  which  we  ought  not  to  have 
done.  ’ 9 


The  Two  Calls 

If  we  are  one  in  the  hidden  life  in  God,  how  shall 
we  realize  this  unity?  Listen  to  Christ’s  two  calls, 
that  go  out  over  the  world  with  ever  fresh  significance. 
In  our  day  Christendom  is  summoned  together  with 
new  sacred  earnestness  by  the  same  two  calls.  They 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


19 


seem  to  be  different,  but  both  are  necessary.  The  one 
runs :  ‘  ‘  Let  ns  sit  at  the  Master ’s  feet  like  Mary,  listen 
to  Him,  quietly  pray  and  talk  together  about  what 
unites  us  and  what  divides  us.  Thus  we  shall  come 
to  an  agreement  at  the  end.”  But  union  around  the 
Saviour  cannot  wait  until  such  agreement  has  been 
reached.  The  Lord  has  another  distinct  call:  “Rise 
and  follow  Me.”  This  call  goes  now  to  every  one  of 
us,  to  every  Christian  communion.  Let  us  rise  and 
follow  Him  in  His  footsteps.  The  world  is  craving 
for  love  and  justice. 

One  morning,  as  we  knelt  in  peace  together  in  the 
cathedral  of  Peterborough,  the  wind  was  howling  and 
screaming  against  its  mighty  walls  and  spires.  What 
was  it?  An  evil  power  that  wanted  to  disturb  our 
devotion?  No,  it  occurred  to  me  that  the  screaming 
and  howling  wind  meant  the  unrest,  the  bodily  starva¬ 
tion,  the  spiritual  anguish  of  martyred  humanity, 
that  asks  more  widely  and  more  loudly  than  ever  be¬ 
fore,  “Where  is  the  Church  of  Christ,  where  are  the 
followers  of  the  Master,  of  the  Prince  of  Peace?” 
We  are  asked  to  come  out.  Let  us  rise  and  follow 
Him — healing,  helping,  learning,  teaching.  In  follow¬ 
ing  Him  and  forgetting  ourselves,  onward  bound,  we 
shall  come  nearer  to  our  Master,  and  thus  inevitably 
to  each  other,  and  become  one. 

“we  know  in  part” 

“We  know  in  part,  and  we  prophesy  in  part,”  thus 
speaks  Paul.  Perhaps  there  is  some  one  who  says, 
“I  know  perfectly  and  I  prophesy  perfectly,  and 


20 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


when  that  which  is  perfect  is  come,  then  that  which  is 
in  part  shall  be  clone  away”  (I  Cor.  13).  Has  per¬ 
fection  appeared  in  the  world  now  after  Paul?  No. 
This  cannot  be  held  by  any  one  who  knows  Christian¬ 
ity  and  evolution.  So,  if  any  individual  Christian  or 
a  small  group  of  Christians  or,  let  us  say,  a  great  and 
powerful  Christian  communion,  perhaps  the  greatest 
of  all,  should  say,  “My  knowledge  is  perfect.  My 
prophecy  is  perfect,  unlike  all  others’,  so  that  I  can¬ 
not  have  anything  in  common  with  other  Christian 
communions,  no  mutual  brotherly  recognition  or  co¬ 
operation,”  we  must  at  least  realize  that  this  Chris¬ 
tian,  this  sect  or  this  communion  shows  pretensions 
and  a  pride  that  Christ’s  greatest  disciple,  the  Apos¬ 
tle  of  the  Gentiles,  thoroughly  rejected.  But  if  all 
Christians  and  all  communions  that  are  faithful  to 
the  Gospel  and  to  Paul  must  thus  say  of  themselves, 
“We  know  in  part  and  we  prophesy  in  part.  That 
which  is  perfect  shall  come  and  then  that  which  is  in 
part  shall  be  done  away,”  it  follows  that  the  Chris¬ 
tian  groups  and  circles  must  not  in  self-righteousness 
cut  themselves  off  from  one  another  but  must  help  and 
learn  from  one  another. 

The  consequence  of  this  is  by  no  means  indifference 
or  false  tolerance.  Each  of  us  must  strive  after  cer¬ 
tainty.  Each  of  us  and  each  communion  to  which 
we  belong  must  defend  with  all  our  Strength  the 
truth  that  God  has  entrusted  to  us,  against  everything 
that  appears  as  error,  as  a  distortion  or  a  diminution 
of  Christian  truth.  But  if  we  are  Christ’s  disciples, 
we  must  acknowledge  one  another  as  brothers,  con¬ 
scious  of  our  own  imperfections. 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


21 


Unity ,  not  Uniformity 

There  are  differences  between  the  Christian  con¬ 
fessions  both  in  essentials  and  nnessentials.  Different 
experiences,  different  national  characters,  the  decisive 
influence  of  great  personalities,  and  the  course  of  his¬ 
tory  have  produced  different  types  of  Christian  piety, 
different  forms  of  Christian  life  in  the  individual  and 
in  the  organization,  and  in  the  common  worship  of  the 
religious  communion. 

No  one  can  ask  one  or  the  other  of  the  Christian 
confessions  to  do  away  with  its  peculiarities.  Devo¬ 
tion  to  their  ancestors,  fidelity  to  an  accepted  and 
precious  inheritance,  forbid  it.  It  is  not  only  a  ques¬ 
tion  of  habit  and  predilection,  but  personal  convic¬ 
tion  has  its  say.  Just  as  the  same  overcoat  can  be 
used  by  many,  although  it  does  not  really  fit  them  all, 
so  common  formulas  become  an  approximately  correct 
and  indispensable  expression  for  all  who  belong  to 
the  same  religious  group,  although  such  symbols  or 
confessions  do  not  exactly  or  completely  cover  the 
convictions  of  the  individual.  For  many  a  one  it 
becomes  a  bounden  duty  not  to  fail  his  own  confession 
in  small  and  great  things. 

One  seldom  considers  that  the  very  idea  of  unity 
forbids  lack  of  faith  to  the  confession,  for  the 
unity  of  Christians  and  mutual  understanding  and 
co-operation  of  the  Church  of  Christ  must  be  a  unity 
in  variety;  not  a  total  of  many  greater  or  smaller 
numbers,  but  a  body  with  different  members,  all  nec¬ 
essary  for  the  life  of  the  whole.  Unity  is  measured 
not  quantitatively  but  qualitatively.  Each  new  con- 


22 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


tribution  will  mean  not  only  a  higher  number — that 
is,  a  subordinate  or  indifferent  matter — but  a  greater 
spiritual  wealth.  Thus  the  idea  of  unity  does  not 
demand  that  the  different  confessions  shall  abandon 
themselves  but  that  they  should  be,  and  be  more  and 
more,  themselves.  One  and  all  must  develop  their 
special  gifts  they  have  received,  more  and  more 
clearly,  powerfully  and  abundantly,  for  the  benefit  of 
the  whole  organism. 

Everything  living  is  characteristic,  individual  and 
concrete.  Only  the  artificial  and  mechanical  stop  at 
general  qualities.  Real  life,  nay,  even  the  products  of 
art  as  far  as  they  are  brought  forth  by  a  creative 
genius,  is  distinguished  by  such  individualization 
that  there  are  no  two  identical  beings.  Only  by  ab¬ 
straction  from  less  essential  features  can  beings  be 
grouped  under  large  basic  types.  The  same  is  true 
in  the  history  of  religion.  No  single  religious  per¬ 
sonality  who  deserves  this  name  is  quite  like  another 
in  his  piety.  Differences  and  nuances  shade  imper¬ 
ceptibly  into  each  other.  But  in  the  eyes  of  our 
spirit  the  different  groups  within  Christianity  collect 
into  great  characteristic  types  of  religion.  It  would 
be  the  greatest  disservice  to  the  idea  of  unity  if  we 
were  in  any  way  to  weaken  or  plane  away  these  con¬ 
fessional  or  traditional  types  of  piety  for  the  sake  of 
a  colourless  and  rather  dull  universalism.  What  we 
and  Christianity  and  the  whole  world  need  is  not 
general  ideas  but  the  vital  growth  of  the  Spirit  in 
the  depths  and  in  the  heights.  The  question  then 
arises:  How  are  we  to  deal  theoretically  with  dif¬ 
ferences  ? 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


23 


Apologetics  and  Polemics 

How  have  they  been  dealt  with  in  Christendom? 
The  answer  can  be  expressed  in  two  words — apolo¬ 
getics  and  polemics.  Both  have  a  bad  or  at  least  an 
ambiguous  sound  and  rightly  so,  for  apologetics  gen¬ 
erally  produces  no  really  truthful  works — I  mean 
what  is  usually  called  apologetics.  It  is  often  at  vari¬ 
ance  with  Jesus’  rule  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
and  elsewhere  about  incorruptible  sincerity.  One 
knows  beforehand  what  is  to  be  proved.  One  has 
views  or  a  system  in  readiness.  One  accepts  the  whole 
thing  in  the  lump,  no  matter  whether  a  communion 
or  a  party  or  any  other  corporation  furnishes  the 
goods.  Then  it  is  to  be  proved  that  just  these  goods 
are  the  best.  The  apologist  is  tempted  to  use  the 
bagman’s  tricks.  In  the  work  of  what  is  commonly 
called  apologetics  there  is  as  a  rule  no  trace  of  the  ex¬ 
ploring  sense,  no  hunger  and  thirst  for  truth,  but  it 
is  necessary,  skilfully  and  convincingly,  to  present 
the  result  as  issuing  from  investigation  and  proofs, 
while  it  was  really  ready  beforehand.  One  has  to 
smile  sometimes  when  one  sees  how  clever  the  apolo¬ 
gist  is  at  finding,  even  in  the  smallest  detail,  that 
just  his  own  confession  is  the  best,  and  not  only  the 
best  but  in  the  end  the  only  possible  one.  I  need  not 
enter  here  upon  other  meanings  of  the  word  apolo¬ 
getics.  The  claims  may  be  slighter.  If  apologetics 
does  not  desire  to  be  more  than  pedagogical  guidance 
and  spiritual  assistance  for  those  who  seek  support 
and  help,  then  nothing  but  good  can  be  said  about  it. 
But  that  which  usually  passes  under  the  name  of 


24 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


apologetics  wounds  the  sense  of  truth  and  the  sincerity 
of  the  questing  soul. 

If  we  add  to  this  polemics — religious,  theological, 
and  clerical  polemics — it  is  certainly  no  honourable 
memorial  we  shall  write  on  the  Church.  In  order  to 
make  the  task  easier,  the  opponent’s  ideas,  words  and 
deeds  are  usually  misinterpreted.  One  turns  against 
a  caricature  instead  of  taking  reality  as  it  is  and,  ac¬ 
cording  to  the  Christian  commandment,  puts  the  best 
construction  on  everything.  An  Anglican  friend  said 
to  me  many  years  ago  that  it  would  be  a  good  service 
to  the  cause  of  religion  if  all  clerical  papers  could  be 
abolished.  There  is  truth  in  his  paradox.  It  seems 
to  be  not  unknown  for  a  paper  that  has  especially 
announced  its  Christian  character  to  get  a  reputation 
for  methods  that  are  condemned  by  ordinary  jour¬ 
nalistic  morality.  This  is  of  course  not  always  the 
case.  We  can  also  understand  with  a  good  intention 
that  the  passions  and  the  human  element  in  mankind 
are  tempted  and  set  in  train  worse  when  it  is  a  ques¬ 
tion  of  that  which  is  more  vital  than  anything  else — 
religious  conviction — than  when  less  important  things 
are  concerned.  But  in  this  case  tout  comprendre  is 
not  tout  pardonner ,  even  though  our  Saviour  asks 
forgiveness  for  those  who  know  not  what  they  do. 
Even  when  the  polemics  between  the  confessions  have 
not  been  waged  with  prison  and  torture,  with  the 
sword  and  the  stake,  but  with  the  pen  and  the  tongue, 
they  have  generally  been  a  disgrace  to  Christianity. 

This  would  be  the  place  for  a  description  of  the 
mental  discipline  that  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel  has 
produced.  I  could  show  how  earnestness  and  perti- 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


25 


nence  in  mutual  discussion  is  a  sign  of  nobility  in 
confessions  and  individuals  that  have  attained  further 
than  the  others  in  Christian  culture.  From  different 
times,  but  chiefly  from  our  own  days,  I  could  show 
conversations,  carried  on  in  exemplary  love  of  truth, 
peace  and  harmony,  about  such  things  as  separate  us 
in  doctrine  and  life.  The  well-known  method  of  ex¬ 
plaining  diverging  opinions  as  being  due  to  moral 
defects  is  still  employed  in  certain  quarters.  Facts 
are  distorted.  Religions,  like  political  frontiers,  un¬ 
fortunately  often  mean  frontiers  for  confidence.  I 
know  some  one  who,  when  travelling,  never  fails  to 
obtain  the  country’s  school-books  in  history.  They 
are  illuminating.  One  gets  to  know  the  national  dog¬ 
mas  and  one  is  depressed  at  the  ability  to  colour  and 
distort  involuntarily.  One  also  gets  to  know  some¬ 
thing  of  the  nation’s  culture.  A  few  years  ago  I 
bought  some  Danish  text-books  for  the  elementary 
schools.  I  turned  to  the  most  bitter  conflicts  with 
Sweden.  I  found  that  exactly  the  same  exposition 
could  be  used  in  our  Swedish  schools.  The  same  ac¬ 
curacy  and  culture  do  credit  to  certain  theological 
productions  which  are  concerned  with  depicting  an 
opposed  party.  Unfortunately  this  does  not  alter  the 
general  observation  that,  even  when  we  rise  from  the 
lower  level  of  ephemeral  periodical  literature  to  the 
learned  dissertations  of  theologians,  polemics  in 
Christianity  is  generally  lacking  in  essentials.  It  does 
not  try  to  understand  its  opponents.  As  a  rule  it 
cannot  understand  them,  but  tries  to  crush  them, 
though  perhaps  with  pleasant  words  and  honourable 
sincerity.  Behind  this  method  we  find,  if  the  line  is 


26 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


extended,  the  very  idea  of  uniformity  that  we  have 
just  rejected  in  the  name  of  life  itself. 

At  best  polemics  between  confessions,  even  if  it 
does  touch  essentials,  becomes  a  discussion  on  incom¬ 
mensurable  greatnesses.  We  shall  give  only  one  exam¬ 
ple,  but  one  that  concerns  the  most  profound  differ¬ 
ences  in  Christian  religious  life.  What  do  genuine 
mysticism  and  intellectual  contemplation  know  of  the 
pathos  of  the  prophetic  and  evangelic  communion 
with  God?  And  what  does  the  latter  understand  of 
the  former? 


Schleiermacher’s  View 

Friedrich  Sehleiermacher,  the  greatest  architect  of 
the  Evangelic  faith,  transformed  the  sense  of  the 
words  apologetics  and  polemics  in  accordance  with 
the  spiritual  structure  that  he  raised  up.  Already 
Paul  saw  that  gifts  are  of  many  kinds.  God  has  not 
given  everything  to  a  single  person  or  a  single  con¬ 
gregation  within  Christendom.  One  communion  has 
developed  its  charisma  during  the  course  of  history, 
the  other  communion  another  gift  of  grace.  Is  not 
the  divine  truth  too  rich  and  superhuman  to  be  en¬ 
tirely  grasped  by  us?  Its  pure  light  is  refracted  and 
appears  in  the  divisions  of  Christ’s  Church  in  many 
colours,  which  are  unlike  one  another.  We  should 
become  involved  in  an  endless  and  fruitless  war  of 
words  if  we  tried  to  decide  which  is  the  most  beau¬ 
tiful  and  which  ought  to  disappear.  They  are  all 
needed  to  form  the  pure  and  perfect  light.  This 
image,  like  all  others,  must  not  be  pressed  too  far. 

Sehleiermacher  has  predecessors  both  within  Evan- 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


27 


gelic  and  Roman  Christendom.  He  carried  through 
the  idea  that  the  different  religious  communions  put 
forth  or  at  least  have  seized  upon  a  certain  factor  of 
revelation  or  of  religious  life. 

According  to  Schleiermacher  the  task  of  apologetics' 
is  to  discover  what  is  the  real  essence  of  each  separate 
confession.  This  is  no  easy  task.  The  confession  is 
misunderstood  if  it  is  supposed  to  be  completely  ex¬ 
pressed  in  a  number  of  formulated  doctrines.  To 
seek  for  the  essence  in  each  of  the  typical  forms  of 
Christianity  is  a  great  scientific  task  that  theology 
cannot  evade,  though  it  is  both  difficult  and  delicate. 

Thus  apologetics  will  no  longer  be  a  quibbling  in 
a  coarser  or  finer  form,  but  will  be  the  masterpiece  of 
religious  scholarship.  The  object  of  apologetics  is  not 
to  defend  one’s  own  point  of  view  against  that  of 
others,  but  it  is  to  pierce  all  the  deceptive  appear¬ 
ances,  all  the  outworks,  all  the  lumber  which  in  well- 
meaning,  defensive  zeal  or  simply  through  mental 
insolence  and  submission  to  lower  religious  inclina¬ 
tions  have  accumulated  or  have  been  allowed  to  ac¬ 
cumulate  round  the  real  vital  centre  of  the  com¬ 
munion. 

Schleiermacher  was  of  course  the  victim  of  an  illu¬ 
sion  in  believing  that  the  fundamental  characters  of 
the  different  forms  of  religion  can  be  arranged  in  a 
systematic  whole.  History  is  not  decided  at  any  pro¬ 
fessor’s  desk.  Schleiermacher ’s  chief  idea  is  correct 
and  exceedingly  important.  It  is  high  time  that  re¬ 
ligious  scholarship  took  it  up  seriously.  We  Evan- 
gelics  can  easily  say  what  offends  us,  for  instance 
in  the  Roman  Catholic  cult  and  spirit ;  it  is  also  easy 


28 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


.for  the  Roman  Catholic  to  say  what  he  finds  strange 
or  perilous  in  the  Evangelic  faith  and  confession. 
It  is  more  difficult  to  answer  the  questions:  What  is 
the  real  ideal  of  Roman  Catholic  piety,  and  what  is 
the  real  ideal  of  Evangelic  Catholic  piety? 

If  such  questions  were  even  approximately  answered 
the  multitude  of  confessions  and  religious  types  in 
Christianity  would  get  quite  a  different  life  and  in¬ 
terest. 

If  we  have  ascertained  the  real  essence  of  each 
communion,  Schleiermacher  derives  a  practical  task 
from  this.  This  task  he  calls  polemics. 

Has  a  noble  disposition  that  exists  in  a  human 
being  come  into  its  own,  or  has  it  been  suppressed  by 
all  sorts  of  lower  inclinations,  by  worldly  cares  and 
frivolity  of  idleness  ?  The  same  anxious  quest  can  be 
made  to  some  extent  about  every  human  society, 
especially  of  a  human  group  that  is  bound  together 
by  a  common  faith  and  history.  Each  part  of  Christ’s 
Church  displays  in  its  origin,  and  when  its  vital 
nerve  is  revealed,  beneath  the  strain  of  history  or  in 
its  noblest  spirits,  a  fundamental  character,  clearly 
conceived  from  the  beginning,  perhaps  personified  in 
a  prophetic  figure,  or  realized  gradually  during  the 
course  of  its  development,  a  character  that  constitutes 
at  the  same  time  its  spiritual  strength  and  its  real 
justification  within  Christendom.  But  this  soul  may 
sully  its  idealism  with  lower  and  slighter  claims.  It 
may  also  become  unrecognizable  on  account  of  for¬ 
eign  additions,  generally  relics  of  primitive  religious 
stages  which  are  ineradicable  like  weeds  and  emerge 
as  soon  as  there  is  an  opportunity.  In  certain  quar- 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


29 


ters  in  Christendom  it  is  made  a  rule  to  reform  down¬ 
wards  and  admit  inferior  cults  and  pagan  supersti¬ 
tion  so  as  to  get  the  masses  in  and  make  the  primi¬ 
tive  instincts  feel  at  home.  Luther  ’s  words  in  the  first 
of  the  Ninety-five  Theses  of  1517,  that  a  Christian’s 
life  shall  be  a  continuous  penitence,  applies  therefore 
to  every  religious  community  that  has  not  fallen  into 
the  sleep  of  death  and  self-satisfaction.  The  noble 
plantation  must  continually  be  weeded.  From  ad¬ 
joining  ground  inferior  religious  phenomena  make 
their  way  and  threaten  to  destroy  the  character  of  the 
special  communion  and  depreciate  its  value. 

It  is  this  operation  that  Schleiermacher  aims  at 
with  religious  polemics.  In  each  religious  community 
its  essence  must  be  asserted  against  all  sorts  of  de¬ 
terioration  and  foreign  additions.  The  very  principle 
in  each  confession  must  have  an  opportunity  to  grow 
out  in  the  light  of  the  divine  sun  in  order  to  display 
and  realize  its  whole  meaning. 

The  different  confessions  can  unite  on  such  polemics 
as  far  as  they  are  able  to  rise  from  the  fogs  of  sec¬ 
tarianism  and  fanaticism  to  the  pure  air  of  veracity. 
Could  not  a  Roman  Catholic  unite  with  an  Evan¬ 
gelic  Christian  in  the  combat  against  superstition 
which  the  Roman  Church  tolerates  or  favours,  or  in 
the  airing  of  the  impure  atmosphere  often  attached 
to  auricular  confession?  Could  not  an  Evangelic 
Christian  unite  with  a  Roman  Catholic  in  condemning 
the  competition  that  often  disfigures  and  injures  the 
activity  of  the  Evangelic  communities  or  the  un¬ 
emotional  dulness  that  is  sometimes  characteristic  of 
Protestant  worship?  Here  it  is  not  a  question  of  a 


30  CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 

Roman  Catholic  fighting  against  Evangelic  religion, 
nor  a  Calvinist  nor  a  Lutheran  fighting  against  other 
forms  of  Christianity,  but  of  helping,  within  each 
confession,  its  better  self  to  a  victory  over  evil  in¬ 
clinations.  One  human  being  can  scarcely  do  another 
a  better  service  than  this.  We  must  feel  bitter  grief 
when  we  see  in  contemporary  history  how  interna¬ 
tional  polemics  makes  it  difficult  for  the  good  and 
blessed  spirits  of  a  nation  to  resist  the  easily  explain¬ 
able  but  deeply  regrettable  inclinations  toward  un¬ 
scrupulous  nationalism  and  bitter  isolation.  Instead 
of  helping  the  true  and  dignified  soul  of  a  nation  to 
overcome  its  internal  foes,  the  unchecked  enemies  of 
international  and  national  good-will,  the  actual  policy 
in  Europe  favours  the  spirit  of  suspicion  and  revenge. 
The  different  parts  of  the  Christian  Church  ought  to 
set  a  good  example.  One  confession  should  not  try 
to  do  the  other  harm,  but  with  a  pure  heart  should 
aid  it  in  the  hardest  of  all  struggles,  the  struggle 
against  its  own  lower  self.  If  I  venture  to  call 
Gustaf  Aulen’s  application  of  such  problems  in  his 
book,  “ Evangelislti  och  Vormerskt,”  masterly,  it  is 
in  the  first  place  because  he  is  severest  against  the 
widespread  shortcomings  in  his  own  communion. 

Glubokow sky’s  Walls 

Professor  Nicolas  Clubokowsky  of  Petrograd,  now 
in  Belgrad,  the  learned  Orthodox  patristician,  cre¬ 
ated  an  incomparable  image  for  this  in  his  Olaus 
Petri  lectures  at  the  University  of  Upsala.  He 
showed  how  the  conquests  made  by  Rome  within  the 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


31 


region  of  the  Orthodox  Church  by  means  of  unprin¬ 
cipled  compromise  in  the  form  of  unions,  when  con¬ 
sidered  more  deeply,  are  seen  to  injure  the  cause  of 
unity  instead  of  promoting  it.  The  unity  that  our 
Saviour  loves  and  ordains  cannot  be  brought  about  by 
means  of  mutual  propaganda  and  conquest.  It  must 
be  sought  in  the  heights  or  in  the  depths  of  the  com¬ 
munion's  spiritual  being.  He  took  the  image  from  his 
native  country.  A  Russian  house  may  be  divided  into 
several  rooms  by  low  wTalls.  Up  above  there  are  no 
dividing  walls ;  down  below  the  people  live  in  separate 
rooms.  Is  unity  to  be  gained  by  thrusting  the  walls 
aside  so  that  those  who  live  in  the  other  rooms  must 
either  be  crushed  to  death  or  leave  their  dwellings  and 
enter  the  one  that  is  taking  possession  of  more  and 
more  of  the  floor  space?  Or  must  they  be  crowded 
and  quarrel  about  the  space?  Glubokowsky  indicated 
another  way  out  of  the  difficulty.  Let  the  walls  re¬ 
main.  Each  individual  thrives  best  in  his  spiritual 
home.  One  may  of  course  appreciate  another’s  home 
and  still  remain  and  thrive  best  in  one’s  own.  No, 
the  demand  that  is  made  of  us  is  greater  and  more 
difficult  than  to  increase  a  little  or  much  at  the  ex¬ 
pense  of  others.  That  which  takes  place  to  the  detri¬ 
ment  of  our  brethren  is  no  real  gain.  Nations  that 
live  on  conquests  are  still  at  a  low  stage  of  political 
and  social  culture.  So  is  the  communion  which  uses 
every  means  to  strive  for  power  and  external  con¬ 
quests.  Do  not  move  the  walls.  But  let  us  all  grow 
in  faith,  hope  and  love,  so  that  we  reach  above  the 
divisions  and  see  and  show  our  membership  of  the 
same  Church  and  congregation  of  Christ. 


32 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Spiritual  Unity  and  Diversity 

Each  real  renewal  means  the  breaking  through  of 
the  immanent  truth  and  victory  over  error.  The  wit¬ 
nesses  of  truth  accomplish  this  work  wherever  they 
appear.  To  the  Christian  theologian  Schleiermacher 
assigns  a  task  that  is  to  a  great  extent  common,  as 
the  same  evil  spirits  continually  threaten  all  com¬ 
munions  without  exception.  In  addition  each  con¬ 
fession  has  its  special  temptations  and  difficulties. 
Let  the  essence  come  forth  in  its  purity  and  strength 
in  every  part  of  Christendom  where  the  Spirit  brings 
redemption  and  eternal  life. 

Apologetics  and  polemics  of  this  sort  counteract  an 
insipid  and  empty  internationalism  and  interconfes- 
sionalism.  We  can  seek  unity  by  spreading  a  sort  of 
covering  over  all  points  of  separation  and  pretend,  at 
least  for  a  while,  that  they  do  not  exist.  This  may 
be  successful  for  superficial  natures,  but  not  for  those 
who  are  deeply  rooted  in  the  ground  of  religion.  As 
we  have  seen,  Schleiermacher  indicates  an  opposite 
method  of  realizing  unity.  Let  apologetics  find  out 
and  expound,  charitably  and  sagaciously,  what  is  the 
real  vital  essence  of  each  confession.  Then  let  polem¬ 
ics  uprightly  and  impartially  combat  and  remove 
everything  that  prevents  what  is  genuine  and  valuable 
from  developing  into  the  bloom  and  the  fruit  that  the 
Creator  has  intended.  The  Christian  Church  will  not 
then  be  tempted  to  suppress  and  check  multiplicity  in 
favour  of  one  type  of  religion  or  another.  Still  less 
will  she  let  the  noble  seed  of  the  Gospel  be  choked  by 
the  weeds  of  primitiveness.  Unity  will  be  brought 


THE  UNITY  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


33 


about  in  multiplicity.  The  more  strongly  each  divine 
gift  that  has  fallen  to  the  lot  of  one  or  the  other 
communion  is  developed,  the  more  abundant  and 
beautiful  will  be  the  organism  of  the  Church  as  a 
whole. 

The  history  of  the  Church  shows  in  many  respects 
how  the  sincere  unity  of  the  Spirit  can  exist  between 
different  creeds  if  they  are  inspired  with  the  same 
religious  earnestness.  If  we  examine  the  religious 
contrasts  in  the  Christianity  of  our  times  and,  would 
it  were  better,  the  often  stupid  dissensions  carried 
on  between  different  Christian  movements  and  com¬ 
munions,  we  often  find  that  the  oppositions,  when 
looked  at  more  deeply,  are  not  between  two  types  of 
religion,  but  on  the  one  side  there  is  the  upright  zeal 
of  piety  and  on  the  other  the  interests  of  power  or 
consideration  for  ecclesiastical  policy  or  rationalism, 
or  parties  who  imagine  that  they  are  contending 
about  religion  but  who  are  really  looking  after  other 
interests. 

I  will  mention  one  example.  Martin  Luther ’s 1 
piety  in  its  full  development  became  a  typical  con¬ 
trast  to  classical  mysticism,  perfected  in  Plotinus  and 
continued  in  the  Middle  Ages.  Nevertheless  he  en¬ 
joyed  its  products  because  he  recognized  in  them  an 
unworldliness  and  sincerity  that  belong  to  every  gen- 

1  In  this  hook  I  mention  Martin  Luther  and  I  quote  him 
more  often  than  necessary.  This  has  two  reasons.  I  belong 
to  a  section  of  the  Church  which  has  learned  much  from 
Luther,  and  personally  I  have  been  a  student  of  Luther  dur¬ 
ing  my  whole  investigation  of  religion.  Further,  I  think  that 
Luther  is  less  familiar  to  the  majority  of  my  readers. 


34 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


nine  communion  with  God.  On  the  other  hand  he 
opposed  Zwingli  at  Marburg  unreasonably  and  un¬ 
happily,  although  they  both  belonged  to  the  move¬ 
ment  for  reform.  At  Marburg  (1529)  Luther  was 
not  conscious  of  different  types  of  religion,  but  he 
thought  he  perceived  a  different  spirit  in  the  others. 
It  meant  that,  justly  or  unjustly,  he  missed  in  them 
the  all-devouring  religious  passion  that  filled  his  own 
soul. 

I  hope  I  have  shown  with  sufficient  clearness  how 
thus  Christian  unity  does  not  mean  uniformity,  but 
that  on  the  contrary  it  must  become  a  unity  in 
variety.  We  shall  return  to  this  subject  when  we  have 
considered  history. 


n 

THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM 


II 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM 

IN  this  chapter  we  shall  investigate  in  what  the 
divisions  consist.  We  shall  devote  most  atten¬ 
tion  to  religions  causes  that  have  brought  about 
the  division  of  Christianity.  We  must  unfortunately 
add  a  word  about  the  oppositions  that  have  been 
intensified  or  caused  by  the  war. 

The  one  catholic,  universal,  ecumenical  Church  has 
three  main  parts:  the  Orthodox,  the  Roman,  and  the 
Evangelic,  in  addition  to  minor  communions  which 
do  not  belong  to  these  three  great  groups.  Within 
the  sphere  of  Orthodox  Christendom  there  are  many 
sects  which  have  separated  from  the  orthodox  rite  or 
have  been  cut  off.  In  Roman  Christianity  the  dif¬ 
ferent  monastic  orders,  particularly  the  division  be¬ 
tween  the  parochial  clergy  and  the  monks,  correspond 
in  part,  at  least,  to  the  divisions  of  Evangelic  Chris¬ 
tianity  into  confessions,  communions,  and  sects. 

Schism  or  division  into  separate  communions  has 
three  principal  causes;  namely,  (1)  the  appearance  of 
prophets  (or  tension  between  institutional  and  per¬ 
sonal  religion)  ;  (2)  separation  for  the  sake  of  purity 
(formation  of  sects)  ;  (3)  the  special  character  of  the 
nations.  In  other  words,  we  distinguish  between 
(1)  those  who  have  been  expelled,  (2)  those  who  have 

37 


38 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


departed,  and  (3)  those  who  have  organized  them¬ 
selves  according  to  nations. 

THOSE  WHO  WERE  PUT  OUT 

The  higher  religion  has  essentially  two  main  forms, 
institutional  and  personal.  They  may  also  be  called 
statutory  religion  and  spiritual  religion.  We  are  only 
able  to  distinguish  them  clearly  when  a  prophet  has 
appeared  and  through  him  has  come  regeneration. 
But  even  then  they  are  not  completely  distinguished. 
To  a  certain  extent  they  presuppose  each  other.  No 
personal  religion  can  in  the  end  dispense  with  the 
firm  f ramework  of  rules,  forms,  and  religious  institu¬ 
tions.  No  organization  of  ordinances  and  ceremonies 
can  come  into  existence  without  the  presence  of 
spiritual  life,  even  though  later  the  organism  may  be¬ 
come  atrophied.  Both  go  together  through  the  ages 
as  the  body  and  soul  of  religion.  Which  is  to  be 
esteemed  the  more  important  ?  The  different  answers 
to  this  question  mean  different  types  of  religion. 

When  within  the  rigid  organism  of  ‘legal  religion 
fresh  personal  intercourse  with  God  arises  in  either 
of  the  main  higher  forms  of  personal  religion,  mys¬ 
ticism  or  prophetic  piety,  the  question  is:  How  much 
of  the  institution  will  the  new  life  be  able  to  pene¬ 
trate  ? 

This  question  applies  especially  to  the  prophetic 
and  evangelic,  positive  and  ethical  form  of  piety, 
because  it  is,  with  regard  to  the  quality  of  the  ec¬ 
clesiastical  system,  more  difficult  than  impersonal 
mysticism,  which  can,  in  case  of  need,  be  content  with 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  39 


any  dwelling-place.  The  divine  intercourse  in  the 
spirit  of  the  Bible  will  improve  the  world,  not  merely 
escape  from  it. 

A  division  and  a  schism  soon  arise.  The  Biblical 
religion  of  revelation  or  prophecy  began  with  Moses, 
perhaps  with  Abraham.  But  a  part  of  the  people  re¬ 
mained  outside  with  their  heathen  cults  and  customs. 
After  Moses  come  the  Prophets,  time  after  time,  like 
storm-birds.  Some  of  the  pious  followed  the  new 
creative  spirits,  but  others  remained  in  the  legal  re¬ 
ligion  that  crystallized  out  from  Moses’  creation. 
The  Samaritans  recognized  only  the  Torah,  the  Law, 
not  the  Prophets.  And  even  in  the  time  of  Christ 
there  was  among  the  JewTs  a  conservative  group,  the 
Sadducees,  who  did  not  assign  the  same  value  to  the 
prophetic  writings  as  to  the  Law.  A  similar  dif¬ 
ferentiation  took  place  through  John  the  Baptist. 
Owing  to  misunderstanding  a  baptist  sect  paid 
homage  to  him,  even  after  his  real  disciples  had  be¬ 
come  followers  of  Jesus.  It  became  necessary  to  say 
expressly  about  John  the  Baptist,  “He  was  not  the 
light”  (St.  John  1:8). 

Jesus  is  the  greatest  example  in  the  history  of  re¬ 
ligion  of  prophetic  revelation  opposed  to  pious  ob¬ 
servance  of  sacred  rules.  Many  in  the  Jewish  com¬ 
munity  allowed  the  new  spirit  to  penetrate  them. 
But  not  all.  The  Jewish  Messiah,  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
became  an  enemy  in  the  eyes  of  Judaism.  Was  Chris¬ 
tianity  a  new  religion,  a  deviation,  a  separation,  a 
sect?  Or  was  it  an  authentic  continuation?  Jesus 
gave  the  parable  about  the  leaven  that  ferments  the 
whole  dough.  But  Judaism  was  not  entirely  renewed. 


40 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


A  part  of  its  organism  continued  in  existence,  op¬ 
posed,  gradually  more  consciously  and  definitely,  to 
the  part  that  adopted  the  spirit  of  Jesus.  The  vital¬ 
ity  which  dwelt  in  Prophets  and  Psalmists  was  first 
set  free  and  came  forth  in  Jesus.  To  an  enormous 
and  increasing  extent  it  gathered  non- Jewish  human¬ 
ity  into  the  growth  of  revealed  religion. 

Judaism  is  not  to  be  blamed  for  considering  it  a 
violent  measure  when  the  young  Christian  community 
claimed  the  Jewish  Bible  to  be  the  canonical  document 
of  Christianity.  It  is  difficult  for  us  to  realize  the  im¬ 
mensity  of  such  a  measure.  But  still  it  was  true  and 
justified,  if  we  look  at  the  meaning  of  religious  prog¬ 
ress.  It  is  shown  incontrovertibly  by  two  reasons. 

The  Christian  community  was  expelled  by  Judaism 
against  its  will.  Nothing  was  farther  from  Jesus  ’ 
intention  than  to  leave  the  religion  of  His  fore¬ 
fathers.  “I  came  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil”  (Matt. 
5:17).  In  the  New  Testament  the  change  in  the 
Jewish  attitude  is  reflected.  In  Acts  3:17  Jesus’ 
sufferings  are  described  in  a  way  that  spares  the  Jew¬ 
ish  people  of  which  the  first  Christian  community 
formed  a  part.  Peter  says,  “And  now,  brethren,  I 
know  that  in  ignorance  ye  did  it,  as  did  also  your 
rulers.”  But  when  the  Jewish  religion  also  expelled 
Stephen,  and  when  by  Paul  the  contradiction  had 
been  recognized  that  revealed  itself  in  the  Jews’  perse¬ 
cutions  of  the  Christians,  it  is  said  in  Acts  7 : 52, 
“Which  of  the  prophets  did  not  your  fathers  perse¬ 
cute?  and  they  killed  them  that  showed  before  of 
the  coming  of  the  Righteous  One;  of  whom  ye  have 
now  become  betrayers  and  murderers.”  The  move- 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  41 


ment  that  followed  Christ  never  severed  itself  volun¬ 
tarily  from  the  mother*  community,  but  was  excluded. 

The  other  fact  that  I  wish  to  point  out  is  that 
Christianity  is  as  equally  an  authentic  continuation 
of  the  Old  Testament  religion  as  Judaism.  In  the 
case  of  the  Prophets  this  is  obvious.  In  the  time  of 
Jesus  and  afterwards  Judaism  had  no  figure  so  con¬ 
genial  with  the  Prophets  as  He.  What  appeared  to 
Judaism  as  deviation  and  heresy,  was  really  a  re¬ 
generation  and  completion  of  the  creative,  character¬ 
istic  part  of  its  own  classical,  religious  production. 
With  regard  to  later  Judaism  it  seemed  at  first  as  if 
a  gap  existed  between  Jesus  and  His  Jewish  sur¬ 
roundings — which  as  a  matter  of  fact  was  exaggerated 
by  Christianity  too,  because  of  Jesus’  demands  for 
ideal  truth  and  the  resultant  polemics  against  the 
Pharisees,  whose  religious  earnestness  He  shared  of 
course  at  bottom.  It  has  taken  nearly  two  thousand 
years  before  we  now  begin  to  realize  how  Jesus  not 
only  drew  from  the  Prophets  and  Psalmists,  but  also 
continued  the  deeper  religious  channel  of  contem¬ 
porary  Judaism. 

We  also  see  the  same  thrilling  spectacle  in  the  later 
history  of  Christianity.  Is  a  new  creative  spirit  to 
leaven  the  entire  organism  of  the  religious  institu¬ 
tion,  or  is  a  part  of  this  to  remain  outside  the  dis¬ 
turbing  and  vitalizing  onset  of  the  new  force?  This 
fascinating  spectacle  occurs  whenever  original  reli¬ 
gion  wells  up.  In  reality  the  new  spirit  is  never  vic¬ 
torious  throughout.  The  higher  divine  experience 
always  remains  within  a  limited  region.  But  then 
arises  the  question  whether  this  limitation  need  give 


42 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


rise  to  external  division  or  not.  It  is  a  question  as  to 
the  elasticity  and  art  of  government  inherent  in  the 
Church.  Many  circumstances  play  a  part,  even  dif¬ 
ferences  in  civilization  and  national  peculiarities. 

Augustinism  with  its  spiritual  problems  was  never 
adopted  in  the  East — one  of  the  causes,  but  not  the 
main  cause,  of  the  cleavage  of  the  Church  into  a 
Greek  and  a  Roman  section.  Western  Christianity 
was-  able  without  any  schism  to  assimilate  Saint 
Francis,  Saint  Bridget  and  many  other  reforming 
spirits.  It  was  able  to  digest  much  religious  orig¬ 
inality,  but  it  was  not  able  to  digest  Martin  Luther. 

Luther  on  the  Church 

Luther  had  no  dream  of  forming  a  new  religious 
community.  In  the  experience  and  pronouncements 
of  Luther  there  was  no  place  for  sect  or  schism.  The 
thought  of  founding  an  order,  society,  or  any  other 
institution,  or  of  abolishing  or  deserting  the  existing 
order,  for  the  sake  of  crying  abuses,  so  universally 
deplored,  wras  from  the  beginning  as  alien  to  him  as 
to  the  Master  Himself.  This  apears  also  in  his  clumsy 
idealism,  when  he  was  thrust  out  of  the  Church 
against  his  will,  and  necessarily  compelled  to  organize 
new  divisions  of  Christendom.  The  Church  had  no 
more  devoted  son.  Those  who  have  brought  about 
new  things  in  mankind  have  never  been  innovators 
but  devotedly  attached  to  their  spiritual  origins. 
Luther  was  called  upon  to  permeate  the  Church  with 
a  fresh  prophetic  revelation  of  God’s  grace  and  truth. 
But  the  organism  was  not  sufficiently  elastic.  It 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  43 


reacted  in  a  way  that  expelled  Luther  from  the  of¬ 
ficial  institution. 

Still  he  could  never  be  brought  to  the  sectarian 
principle  that  says,  “ Leave  the  Church,  for  it  is  bad; 
we  are  superior.”  No,  the  advantage  of  the  Evan¬ 
gelic  movement  is,  according  to  Luther,  in  the  pure 
Word  of  God.  Life  and  conduct  can  never  become 
in  this  world  as  pure  as  the  Word.  Still  the  Word 
cannot  be  in  vain.  There  are  some  “upright,  pious, 
holy  children  of  God.”  Luther  never  acknowledged 
the  religious  validity  of  his  excommunication,  and, 
unlike  the  sectarians,  he  always  retained  a  living 
feeling  of  the  unity  of  the  Church.  When  his  fol¬ 
lowers  in  Wittenberg  used  his  absence  as  an  oppor¬ 
tunity  for  vehement  innovation,  destroying  images 
and  doing  other  such  things  in  order  to  reform  in  a 
more  conspicuous  and  outward  way,  he  returned  to 
Wittenberg  in  spite  of  the  fear  of  the  Elector,  and 
preached  in  March,  1522,  a  whole  week,  warning  the 
zealous  separatists  and  stating  that  “it  is  no  good  to 
make  sects.”  If  we  make  a  comparative  study  of  the 
Christian  catechisms  our  astonishment  is  unbounded 
at  the  absence  of  all  anti-Roman  polemics  in  Luther’s 
Shorter  Catechism,  which  came  into  existence  at  a 
time  when  the  struggle  raged  most  fiercely  and  which 
for  years  was  prepared  and  formulated  by  a  man  who 
certainly  has  not  spared  his  scoldings  against  the 
papacy.  Even  in  the  Third  Article  no  separation  in 
the  Church  is  indicated.  In  order  to  avoid  the  possi¬ 
bility  of  any  particularist  interpretation  Luther  does 
not  even  use  the  word  Church,  but  speaks  of  “the 
whole  of  Christendom  on  earth.”  No  distinction  is 


44 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


made  between  the  visible  and  invisible  Church,  still 
less  between  the  Evangelic  communities  and  Rome. 
But  the  universal  Church  is  interpreted  religiously. 
It  is  “called  by  the  Spirit.”  In  this  Christendom 
the  soul  enjoys  forgiveness,  peace,  and  eternal 
hope. 

There  is  not  a  hint  of  needful  separation,  not  a 
sign  of  exclusion.  But  he  speaks  of  “the  Spirit  who 
calls  me  by  the  Gospel,  enlightens  me  with  His  gifts, 
sanctifies  me  and  sustains  me  in  a  right  faith,  even 
as  He  calls,  gathers,  enlightens,  hallows  the  whole  of 
Christendom  in  earth,  and  holds  it  in  the  one  true 
faith  by  Jesus  Christ,  in  which  Christendom  He 
richly  forgives  me  and  all  the  faithful,  for  all  our 
daily  sins.” 

Here  the  view  points  neither  to  an  institution  nor 
a  doctrine,  but  exclusively  to  God’s  doings  in  the  past 
and  now;  to  the  Gospel  by  which  the  Spirit  gathers 
the  flock  of  Christ.  Nor  yet  is  the  Gospel  to  be 
counted  as  an  institution.  In  order  to  exclude  all 
hint  of  letter  worship  or  shallowness  such  expressions 
as  “the  Word,”  “the  Scripture,”  are  avoided,  and  we 
are  compelled  to  think  upon  the  contents  of  the  good 
tidings,  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ.  And  yet  the 
religious  society  is  in  no  wise  disregarded  or  unduly 
spiritualized.  It  belongs  itself  to  the  dispensation  of 
salvation,  because  the  soul  lives  in  it  by  God’s  grace. 
This  is  richly  commented  upon  in  the  Greater  Cate¬ 
chism,  where  Luther  speaks  with  hearty  warmth  of  the 
Church  as  the  loving  mother  of  the  Christian.  But 
in  this  classical  passage  on  the  Church  in  the  Smaller 
Catechism  itself  Luther  avoids  even  the  technical  term 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  45 


“Church”:  instead  of  it  he  says  Christendom, 
Christ enheit,  in  order  not  to  narrow  the  view  of  his 
readers. 

It  never  occurs  to  Luther  to  deny  that  the  Church 
was  the  Church  of  Christ,  for  of  course  the  Gospel 
was  in  it.  We  need  not  observe  that  Luther’s  opinion 
about  the  Vatican  would  have  been  very  different  if 
he  had  known  the  papacy  of  our  times.  Like  some 
of  the  Franciscan  Spiritualists  and  other  zealots  in 
the  Middle  Ages  he  got  the  frightful  idea  that  Anti¬ 
christ  was  seated  in  Rome.  But  however  much  an¬ 
noyed  he  may  have  been  with  the  Pope  and  the 
Roman  institution,  of  which  he  says,  as  they  appeared 
to  earnest  reformers  at  that  epoch,  “It  must  certainly 
be  the  Church  of  Satan,”  he  could  still  write  in  his 
drastic  way,  “The  Pope,  Antichrist,  does  not  sit  in  a 
pigsty  or  a  stable  of  the  devil,  but  in  God’s  temple.” 

Luther’s  position  is  the  most  important  counter¬ 
part  in  the  history  of  religion  to  the  separation  of  the 
young  Messianic  communion  from  that  part  of  Juda¬ 
ism  which  cut  itself  off.  Similarly  Rome  and  a  por¬ 
tion  of  the  West  sundered  itself  from  the  prophetic 
movement  in  the  sixteenth  century.  Luther  was  ban¬ 
ished  from  the  religious  institution  against  his  will. 
He  too  followed  the  classical  personages  and  docu¬ 
ments  of  an  older  epoch — Jesus,  Paul,  and  Augustine. 
The  opposition  to  the  contemporary  Church  was  ex¬ 
pressed  as  strongly  as  possible.  Like  all  epoch-making 
spirits  Luther  and  his  successors  were  more  or  less 
unintentionally  unjust  to  the  preceding  epoch  and  to 
the  age  in  which  they  lived.  Such  spirits  shed  their 
light  in  front  of  them,  and  their  vast  forms  conceal 


46 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


that  which  lies  behind.  It  is  only  at  the  present  day 
that  both  the  Church  and  investigators  have  begun  to 
detect  continuity  and  to  understand  Luther  in  an 
unbroken  series  as  completing  the  positive  line  in 
mediaeval  mysticism.  Formerly  he  was  placed  after 
an  evil  and  gloomy  parenthesis  which,  as  the  early 
Church  was  studied  more  and  more,  was  made  to 
begin  farther  and  farther  back. 

We  now  see  that  Luther  was  quite  as  authentic  a 
continuation  of  the  deep  religious  life  of  the  Middle 
Ages  as  Erasmus  or  Loyola.  Erasmus  best  deserves 
the  name  of  reformer.  He  wanted  reform.  He 
wished  to  remove  a  lot  of  weeds  from  life,  worship  and 
doctrine.  Luther  and  Loyola  were  impelled  by  a 
deeper  pathos,  an  all-consuming  desire  for  peace  of 
soul.  They  found  it  in  different  ways,  and  each  in 
his  way  forms  an  original  religious  type.  It  may  be 
disputed  which  is  the  straighter  way,  that  which 
continues  through  Luther,  or  that  which  continues 
through  Ignatius  Loyola  and  Tridentinum.  Com¬ 
pared  with  earlier  mysticism,  and  more  evangelic, 
less  methodical  communion  with  God,  Loyola  denotes 
quite  as  great  a  novelty  as  Luther,  and  Loyola  too 
has  a  positive  religious  ideal.  The  answer  depends 
on  what  one  attaches  greater  importance  to  in  the 
Church,  the  external  or  the  internal,  various  religious 
manifestations  or  the  Gospel. 

It  is  high  time  for  Evangelic  theology  to  abandon 
the  unhistorical  view  of  a  leap  from  Paul  and  Augus¬ 
tine  to  Luther.  Luther  is  not  a  repristinator  but  a 
continuator  and  creator  with  the  material  that  the 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  47 


Church  gave  him.  Even  in  1541  Luther  emphasized 
that  his  part  of  Christendom,  unfortunately  expelled, 
really  belonged  to  the  Church  too.  “No  one  can  deny 
that  both  we  and  the  papists  come  from  the  holy 
baptism  and  are  therefore  called  Christians.”  More¬ 
over,  Luther  and  his  friends  had  the  sacrament,  the 
key-power  of  the  Word,  the  ministry,  the  Apostles’ 
Creed,  the  Lord’s  Prayer,  the  commandment  con¬ 
cerning  the  powers  that  be,  the  marriage  state,  the 
same  sufferings  as  their  brothers  in  the  world.  They 
did  not  shed  blood,  but  were  like  Christ,  the  Apos¬ 
tles,  and  the  ancient  Church.  It  is  therefore  an  im¬ 
pudent  falsehood  to  say  that  they  had  deserted  from 
the  Church  and  founded  a  new  Church.  ‘ 1  They  can¬ 
not  find  anything  new  in  us,”  said  Luther.  On  the 
contrary,  Luther  as  well  as  Erasmus  stood  up  against 
many  practices  and  cults  in  the  Church  that  they 
proved  to  be  decadent  innovations. 

In  the  enforced  cleavage  Roman  Christendom  de¬ 
prived  itself  of  the  mightiest  genius  in  revealed  reli¬ 
gion  after  St.  Paul,  but  also  the  Roman  part  of 
Christendom  was  to  a  great  extent,  though  less  than 
the  Evangelic  part,  influenced  by  Luther  and  the 
Reformation.  On  the  Evangelic  (or  reformed)  side 
much  was  rejected  and  lost  that  in  the  Church  of 
Rome  has  religious  value  even  for  an  Evangelic 
Christian  and  that  was  consonant  with  Luther’s  free¬ 
dom  and  piety  to  take  care  of.  His  successors  often 
lacked  both  freedom  and  piety.  Luther  himself  de¬ 
plored  this  and  even  cherished  noble  components  in 
worship  that  had  fallen  into  decay  and  that  with  curi- 


48 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


ous  ignorance  are  now  sometimes  said  to  be  especially 
Roman,  for  instance  Church  music.1 

That  the  two  chief  currents  of  mediaeval  religion, 
the  more  spontaneous  Evangelic  and  the  method¬ 
ically  mystical,  should  form  two  communities,  with 
Luther  and  Loyola  as  regenerators,  was  clearly  the 
intention,  not  of  the  Reformers,  but  of  Providence. 
Humanly  speaking,  Luther  should  have  become  the 
religious  renewer  of  the  whole  West,  and  such,  in 
spite  of  the  ecclesiastical  division,  he  has  become. 
Those  whom  the  Church  has  condemned  may  after¬ 
wards  be  adopted  as  teachers.  Not  only  are  Roman 
scholars  carried  away  by  the  originality  and  power 
of  Luther’s  religious  genius,  but  they  also  begin  to 
see  more  clearly  the  connection  of  the  Reformation 
with  what  preceded  it — sometimes  more  clearly  than 
the  followers  of  Luther.  The  Redemptorist,  Father 
Clemens  Hoffbauer,  made  a  statement  about  the  causes 
of  the  Reformation  in  Germany  that  is  noteworthy  as 
coming  from  a  Roman  Catholic  investigator:  “The 
defection  from  the  Church  took  place  because  the 
Germans  needed  and  still  need  to  be  religious — not 
by  heretics  and  philosophers  but  by  men  who  really 
desired  religion  for  the  heart  was  the  Reformation 
spread  and  maintained.’ ’ 

In  his  great  work,  “Les  Origines  du  Protestan- 
tisme,”  Imbart  de  la  Tour  has  investigated  and  de¬ 
scribed,  as  no  one  before  him  had,  the  broad  Biblical 
Reformation  in  the  sixteenth  century,  chiefly  in 
France,  but  also  in  the  whole  Church.  He  calls  it 

i  See  my  book,  “Humor  och  Melankoli  och  andra  Luther- 
studier,”  p.  268. 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  49 


evangelism  and  distinguishes  from  it  the  mature 
Lutheran  piety,  characterized  by  the  doctrine  of 
certitude  of  salvation,  which  constitutes,  according  to 
the  eminent  French  scholar,  a  sort  of  new  religion. 
In  the  Reformation  number  of  Revue  de  la  Meta - 
'physique  et  de  Morale  he  has  portrayed  Luther — con¬ 
trary  to  the  established  Roman  view — as  the  great 
mystic  who  has  proceeded  to  exaggeration  in  denying 
the  power  of  human  reason  and  the  human  will. 

How  from  the  syncretism  and  mysticism  of  the 
Church  Martin  Luther  came  forth  with  divine  experi¬ 
ence  and  a  concentrated  sense  of  Cod’s  revelation — 
impelled  by  the  one  thing  needful,  not  by  the  many 
motives  of  the  religious  blending  familiar  to  the 
Church — all  this  has  been  excellently  described  by  a 
brilliant  young  scholar,  Friedrich  Heiler,  now  pro¬ 
fessor  at  Marburg,  sometime  lecturer  in  the  Uni¬ 
versity  at  Munich,  earlier  known  for  his  acute  anal¬ 
ysis  of  Buddhism’s  psychological  method  for  medita¬ 
tion  and  his  great  comparative  work  on  prayer,  which 
reveals  an  equally  great  familiarity  with  Luther’s 
writings  as  with  the  rich  piety  in  the  author’s  own 
mother-church  of  Rome.  There  is  a  curious  power  in 
his  essay  on  Luther’s  e ( Religionsgescliichtliclie  Bedeu- 
tung”  (Munich,  1918,  Ernst  Reinhardt)  in  which  he 
reveals  the  two  main  currents  of  the  higher  religion, 
methodical  mysticism  and  prophetic  revelation,  and 
in  which  Luther  rises  above  the  Evangelic  figures 
that  come  next  in  the  author’s  admiration:  Calvin, 
John  Bunyan,  George  Fox,  Carlyle  and  Kierkegaard. 
The  explanation  is  that  the  writer  himself,  with  all  the 
pathos  of  a  man  to  whom  religion  is,  in  the  words  of 


50 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Carlyle,  “the  chief  fact  with  regard  to  him,”  experi¬ 
enced  the  two  basic  types  of  Western  Christianity  and, 
after  a  scholarly  historical  analysis,  found  in  Luther 
the  real  renewal  of  revealed  religion. 

With  a  proper  feeling  that  the  Reformation  belongs 
to  and  concerns  the  whole  Church,  the  German  Reichs¬ 
tag  decided  in  1917,  at  Herr  Traub’s  suggestion,  to 
commemorate  the  quatercentenary  of  the  Reforma¬ 
tion  by  establishing  an  institute  for  investigating  the 
Reformation  period,  its  members  to  be  composed  of 
both  Roman  Catholic  and  Evangelic  Catholic  scholars. 

Erasmus ,  Martin  Luther,  Ignatius  Loyola 

Christendom  in  the  West  had  its  authentic  continua¬ 
tion  in  the  Evangelic  faith  as  well  as  in  the  Roman 
section.  It  is  not  like  a  fir,  with  one  straight  stem 
from  which  boughs  branch  out,  but  the  Western 
Church  resembles  an  oak,  which  divided  itself  into 
several  branches. 

In  order  to  get  a  survey  of  the  genuine  character  of 
the  divisions  of  the  Church  and  thus  discern  its  in¬ 
herent  continuity  and  unity,  it  is  necessary  to  con¬ 
sider  somewhat  mere  closely  the  three  typical  heroes 
of  religion  in  the  sixteenth  century.  For  our  purpose, 
in  order  to  simplify  the  survey,  we  do  not  make  a 
special  fourth  class  out  of  the  sympathetic  humanistic 
national  type  of  Reformer  in  Zwingli,  because  he 
never  exercised  such  universal  influence  as  the  genius 
of  reformed,  presbyterian  religion,  Calvin.  Nor  do 
we  make  here  a  special  fifth  class  out  of  the  greatest 
disciple  of  Martin  Luther,  which  John  Calvin  became 
through  his  world-conquering,  systematizing  and  or- 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  51 


ganizing  power.  Erasmus,  Luther  and  Loyola  have  of 
course  their  roots  in  the  mediaeval  Church,  pursuing 
old,  different  tendencies  that  in  those  men  revealed 
their  essence  and  developed  characters  as  Reform, 
Prophetic  Creation,  and  Ecclesiastical  Mysticism. 

The  great  majority  of  Christians  live  their  lives 
according  to  the  standard  of  their  duties  in  unshaken 
belief  in  God’s  grace  and  power  without  creating  any 
characteristic  types  of  religious  life.  But  when  wTe 
here  turn  our  attention  to  the  more  strongly  expressed 
forms  of  communion  with  God,  we  can  distinguish  in 
the  mediaeval  Church  three  or  four  main  types.  Their 
characteristics  actually  appear  sharply  defined,  but  in 
certain  combinations,  even  in  the  same  person,  and  yet 
they  are  silhouetted  against  the  background  of  the 
nameless  multitude. 

If  the  majority  of  educated  laymen  had  to  choose, 
they  would  certainly  sympathize,  now  as  before,  with 
the  type  which  I  rank  first  here,  but  which  never 
influenced  Church  life  as  deeply  as  the  others,  because 
it  implies  education  and  not  infrequently  has  borne 
an  aristocratic  or  even  a  learned  character  in  the 
Church.  To  this  class  of  piety  Christianity  has  meant 
true  culture,  being  connected  with  all  noble  learning, 
art  and  letters.  In  the  name  of  an  enlightened  faith 
it  has  scorned  ignorance  and  superstition,  which  the 
Church  has  tolerated  or  sanctioned.  Hence  the  op¬ 
position  common  to  these  mediaeval  tendencies  towards 
the  mendicant  orders,  especially  the  minorities.  It 
has  combated  irrational  doctrines  and  has  denounced 
with  genuine  moral  indignation  worldliness  and  vice 
within  the  Church,  particularly  among  the  leaders. 


52 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Its  watchword  was  reform  of  life  and  doctrine.  It 
was  especially  toward  the  end  of  the  Middle  Ages  that 
it  gathered  ideals  and  motives  for  denunciations 
against  the  Church  from  Bible  reading. 

The  greatest  and  highest  expression  of  this  noble 
religious  type  and  of  its  reforming  tendencies  is  to 
be  found  in  Erasmus,  the  man  who  forged  some  of 
the  weapons  which  the  Reformation  used,  and  who  at 
first  sympathized  with  Luther,  but  later  sheered  away 
from  the  consuming  zeal  that  he  could  not  under¬ 
stand.  He  was  repelled  by  the  elementary  vehemence 
of  the  movement.  The  Erasmian  type  of  religion  has 
existed,  and  still  exists,  in  all  religious  societies  which 
have  attained  to  a  higher  standard  of  literary  culture. 
The  most  learned  of  contemporary  spirits  congenial 
to  Erasmus,  Melanchthon,  became  Luther’s  brother-in¬ 
arms,  yet  not  without  some  involuntary  violence  to 
himself.  He  was  forced  into  a  religious  world  which 
he  could  understand  and  describe,  enabled  by  his 
intelligence  and  his  admiration  for  the  religious  genius 
he  saw  in  his  friend ;  but  the  heights  and  depths  which 
it  contained  were  never  reached  by  the  learned  hu¬ 
manist  of  enlightened  and  harmonious  piety. 

Of  Erasmus’  disciples,  some  became  adherents  of 
the  new  movement,  some  took  up  the  defence  of  the 
Church  against  the  prophetic  criticism,  according  to 
the  example  set  by  Erasmus  himself.  From  a  certain 
point  of  view  the  nature  of  such  piety  can  best  be 
expressed  by  the  word  reform;  for  without  being 
blind  to  the  fact  that  religion  is  the  work  and  gift  of 
God,  it  conceives  Christianity  and  describes  it  as  an 
ideal  of  life,  a  new  and  perfect  “law,”  according  to 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  53 


which  not  only  the  Church  in  deterioration  and  back¬ 
sliding  but  also  each  single  heart  is  to  be  renewed. 
As  of  old,  one  turns  still  to  ancient  times.  The  Fa¬ 
thers  and  the  ancient  Church  were  set  forth  as  an 
example.  Erasmus  expressly  sought  for  a  canon,  in 
the  first  instance  from  Scripture,  but  also  from  the 
Fathers.  The  first  five  or  six  centuries,  considered  as 
a  relatively  complete  and  finished  epoch,  were  made 
an  authority  for  all  times. 

Though  Reformation  is  an  apt  word  for  the  work 
of  Luther  in  his  early  years,  it  can  scarcely  be  used 
to  describe  his  creative  continuation  of  Pauline  the¬ 
ology  and  of  the  positive  trend  of  mysticism.  It  is 
more  significant  as  a  name  for  those  Roman  tendencies 
which  during  the  same  century  advanced  claims  for  a 
return  to  a  purer  life  and  doctrine — never  silent  in 
the  Middle  Ages  and  now  more  firmly  rooted  than 
ever,  owing  to  the  decay  of  the  papacy.  Cardinal 
Contarini  took  an  important  share  in  the  bulls  and 
commissions  for  reform  issued  by  Paul  III.  At  the 
Conference  of  Regensburg  (1541)  he  seemed  to  have 
reached  his-  goal — the  reunion  of  the  Lutherans  for 
the  amelioration  of  Church  and  doctrine.  The  pon¬ 
tificate  of  Marcellus  did  not  last  a  month.  After  that, 
Paul  IV  was  the  second  in  the  papal  line  to  show 
rigid  morals  and  reforming  tendencies.  He  began  his 
reign  in  1555  with  the  promise  of  “faithfully  seeing 
that  the  reform  of  the  universal  Church  and  the  Ro¬ 
man  Court  should  be  undertaken  in  earnest.”  It  was 
he  who  boasted  of  never  letting  a  day  pass  without 
an  effort  for  restoring  the  Church  to  its  primitive 
purity.  Pius  V,  the  most  devout  of  the  reforming 


54 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


popes,  enforced  a  severity  in  his  own  life  and  that  of 
the  enria  in  the  fulfilment  of  episcopal  and  clerical 
duties  as  relentlessly  as  the  Inquisition — revised  dur¬ 
ing  his  reign — executed  its  bloody  work  of  reforma¬ 
tion. 

In  our  Swedish  communion  we  note,  as  an  echo  of 
this  reformation  movement,  the  efforts  of  the  scholarly 
and  artistic  King  John  III.  The  Reformation  had 
dispelled  a  crowd  of  superstitions.  But  the  king 
abhorred  the  profanity  with  which  spiritual  things 
were  treated  in  worship.  In  the  preface  to  the  Liturgy 
of  1575  we  read:  “As  our  predecessors  had  to  fight 
against  superstitions,  so  we  will  have  to  fight  against 
the  still  more  savage  beast  of  profanity.  ...  A  great 
part  of  piety  lies  in  ceremonies.”  In  theological  con¬ 
troversy  King  John  offers  a  warning  against  the  dis¬ 
putes  of  the  Reformers  and  refers  to  the  Fathers  as 
rightly  expounding  Scripture  and  being  opposed  to 
the  false  doctrines  of  later  Rome.  Amongst  the  Ro¬ 
man  Catholic  modernists  of  our  days  similar  notes 
have  been  struck. 

I  am  not  speaking  here  of  a  school  or  tendency,  but 
of  a  type  of  piety  that  appears  in  different  societies, 
temperaments  and  combinations.  We  have  used  the 
great  name  of  Erasmus  to  describe  it.  But  is  not  Eng¬ 
land  its  native  home  before  all  others?  It  was  there 
first  in  Western  Christendom  that  enthusiasm  for  the 
faith  of  the  Church,  combined  with  classical  education, 
burst  into  full  bloom,  to  bear  fruit  in  the  Carolingian 
renaissance.  It  was  in  England  that  the  first  uni¬ 
versity  of  Northern  Europe  was  founded.  There,  at 
a  far  later  time,  the  learned  Wyclif  in  his  reform  of 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  55 


Church  life  and  doctrine,  invoked  that  evangelic  law 
which  Scriptural  research  had  revealed  to  him,  hav¬ 
ing  at  the  same  time  the  feeling — unknown  to  Erasmus 
and  his  compeers — of  a  need  for  anchoring  his  poor 
soul  on  a  bottom  deeper  than  the  noblest  of  human 
aspirations;  that  is,  in  eternal  predestination.  No 
idea  can  possibly  enter  one’s  mind  of  deducing  from 
a  single  religious  type  so  rich  a  growth  as  that  ex¬ 
hibited  by  the  Church  of  England.  That  Church 
while  maintaining  her  continuity  took  a  definite  im¬ 
press  from  the  Reformation,  in  her  Thirty-nine  Arti¬ 
cles  partly  translating  the  “  Confessio  August  ana 
Throughout  the  ages,  down  to  our  own  time,  she  is 
richer  in  mystics  than  perhaps  any  other  comparable 
branch  of  the  Church.  But  I  am  nowhere  so  keenly 
sensible  of  the  beneficent  value  of  dignified,  enlight¬ 
ened  piety,  wide  of  heart  and  open  to  reforms,  as  in 
the  Church  of  England.  Nowhere  has  respect  for  the 
first  centuries  of  the  Church  resounded  with  a  more 
genuine  conviction. 

So  impartial  a  witness  as  Lecky  says:  “Looking  at 
the  Church  of  England  from  the  intellectual  side,  it 
is  plain  how  large  a  proportion  of  the  best  intellect  of 
the  country  is  contented,  not  only  to  live  within  it, 
but  to  take  an  active  part  in  its  ministrations.  There 
is  hardly  a  branch  of  serious  English  literature  in 
which  Anglican  clergy  are  not  conspicuous.  There  is 
no  other  Church  which  has  shown  itself  so  capable 
of  attracting  and  retaining  the  services  of  men  of 
general  learning,  criticism,  and  ability.  ”  1  It  has  also 

1  William  T.  Manning  in  “The  Call  to  Unity,”  New  York, 
1920,  p.  85. 


56 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


been  remembered  that  “the  Anglican  was  the  only 
Church  in  the  sixteenth  century  which  seemed  to  un¬ 
derstand  the  spiritual  significance  of  the  Renaissance. 
.  .  .  The  King  James  translation  of  the  Bible  shows 
the  literary  influence  of  the  Renaissance,  and  the  com¬ 
pilation  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  is  the  embodi¬ 
ment  of  the  new  thought  of  religion  expressed  not  in 
asceticism  but  in  the  fulness  of  life.”  1 

A  genuine  representative  of  the  comprehensive 
Erasmian  via  media  in  the  Church  of  England,  Dr. 
Headlam,  has  lately,  in  an  article  on  Bishop  Henson’s 
brilliant  Olaus-Petri  lectures  in  Upsala  on  Anglican¬ 
ism,  pointed  out  three  main  characteristics:  (1)  Ec¬ 
clesiastical  learning  and  humanism  due  to  a  great  ex¬ 
tent  to  the  importance  of  the  universities  in  building 
up  the  particular  genius  of  the  English  communion, 
(2)  its  episcopal  character,  and  (3)  its  appeal  to  an 
older  historical  Christianity  which  is  not  Protestant 
in  the  modern  sense  nor  Catholic  in  the  Roman  sense, 
but  something  more  comprehensive  than  either  of 
them. 

Martin  Luther  and  Ignatms  Loyola 

The  evangelic  mystic  and  the  ecclesiastical  mystic, 
Martin  Luther  and  Ignatius  Loyola,  contemporaries 
of  Erasmus  in  the  sixteenth  century,  have  influenced 
the  life  of  the  Church  more  deeply  than  he,  because 
they  knew  what  Erasmus  had  never  experienced; 
they  knew  heaven  and  hell.  Both  became  emphatically 
men  of  religion,  being  led  by  different  paths  to  entire 

i  Leighton  Parks  in  “The  Crisis  of  the  Churches,”  Scribner, 
1922,  p.  61. 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  57 


devotion  to  the  question  of  the  soul’s  salvation.  Both 
subjected  themselves  to  unflinching  asceticism  which 
astute  confessors  could  only  alleviate  temporarily. 
Both  these  religious  heroes  are  rooted  in  the  mys¬ 
ticism  of  the  Middle  Ages  and  are  unintelligible  if 
detached  (as  often  happens  in  the  case  of  Luther) 
from  the  various  elements  in  the  complicated  texture 
of  mediaeval  religious  life,  but  neither  of  them  re¬ 
mained  within  the  sphere  of  mediaeval  mysticism. 
They  represent  in  a  certain  degree  its  two  different 
currents — Loyola,  the  methodical  self-training,  which 
lays  stress  upon  the  mystical  and  visionary  experi¬ 
ences  of  the  soul  and  its  merging  into  ecstasy ;  Luther, 
the  more  evangelic  trend,  in  which  religion  is  com¬ 
manded  by  the  antithesis  of  human  guilt,  and  the 
holy,  merciful  grace  of  God  which  generates  in  man 
childlike  trust  and  confidence  of  the  heart  and  the 
divine  service  of  the  daily,  earthly  calling.  But  each 
independently  ushered  in  a  new  epoch.  In  Luther 
the  positive  tendencies  of  mysticism  fostered  a  fresh 
assurance  of  the  divine  revelation  and  salvation. 
Loyola  subjected  the  mystical  training  of  the  soul 
entirely  to  the  Church. 

Martin  Luther’s  Originality 

It  need  not  be  specially  shown  that  with  Luther 
a  new  period  begins,  whether  one  looks  upon  it  as 
contemporary  Rome  does,  as  a  deviation  from  the 
Church’s  right  path,  or  as  a  continuation  of  the  high¬ 
road,  begun  and  prescribed  by  the  Gospel  in  the  suc¬ 
cession  of  Christ,  from  which  official  Rome  had 
strayed.  With  an  increasing  number  of  present-day 


58 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


scholars  it  is  observed  that  the  path  of  Western 
Christendom  divided  in  the  sixteenth  century  when 
that  which  had  dwelt  together  in  the  broad  bosom  of 
the  mediaeval  Church  was  brought  forth  as  an  unequal 
pair  of  twins,  one  of  which — the  prophetic  interpreter 
of  the  good  tidings,  redemption,  and  consolation — 
proceeded  on  his  own  path,  characterized  by  the 
“ Confessio  Augustana”  and  a  series  of  symbols  in  its 
spirit  ;  while  the  other — the  Roman  movement — after 
the  hesitation  of  some  decades,  followed  another  path, 
marked  by  Tridentinum  and  the  subsequent  mileposts 
that  lead  to  the  Vatican  Council. 

If  we  wish  to  continue  the  metaphor  we  may  speak 
of  a  third  path,  denoted  by  Anabaptists  and  other 
lovers  of  Jesus,  mystics  and  thinkers  who  did  not  feel 
at  home  in  either  of  these  highroads  of  the  Church 
but  chose  their  own,  not  seldom  difficult,  paths. 

If  we  listen  to  those  in  all  centuries,  but  most  em- 

i 

phatically  those  in  the  sixteenth,  who  demanded  the 
reform  of  the  Church  according  to  the  law  of  the 
Gospel,  we  are  tempted  to  denote  the  path  of  Eras¬ 
mus  and  the  numerous  reformers  of  the  same  period  as 
the  real,  direct  continuation  of  the  Church’s  course. 

The  historical  judgment  is  easily  mingled  here 
with  a  valuation.  Both  friends  and  enemies  of  Lu¬ 
ther’s  action  have  suggested  that  Luther’s  originality 
should  be  summed  up  in  the  certainty  of  redemption, 
certitudo  salutis,  the  assurance  of  salvation  that  has 
enraptured  so  many  consciences  after  the  melancholy 
monk  of  Wittenberg,  hungering  for  peace  of  soul. 
Can  a 'soul  be  assured  of  its  salvation?  Is  it  not  a 
gross  offence  against  the  key-power  of  the  Church? 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  59 


Is  it  not  a  bold  outbreak  of  that  spiritual  assumption 
which,  according  to  Hellenic  and  other  experience, 
divine  powers  enviously  punish,  and  which  all  delicate 
minds  fear  as  assurance  that  goes  before  a  fall? 
Luther  was  not  calm  and  confident.  Read  how  his 
passionate  soul  was  cast  into  the  paroxysms  of  anguish 
and  despair.  But  he  knew  that  God  was  gracious  and 
that  Christ  was  his  Lord.  Thus  the  soul  could  and 
must  be  assured  and  safe. 

Nothing  can  denote  the  difference  more  clearly.  On 
one  side  is  the  personal  religion  that  refers  the  soul 
to  Christ,  the  revealed  God,  to  obtain  certainty  and 
spiritual  freedom  in  complete  submission  to  His  do¬ 
minion.  On  the  other  side  is  the  institution  of  re¬ 
demption,  which  takes  charge  of  the  soul  and  keeps 
its  account  with  God  and  finally  solves  the  problem 
of  certitude  by  the  Vatican  Council’s  decision  as  to 
the  Pope’s  infallibility. 

The  legend  of  Luther  as  the  advocate  of  reason  and 
the  human  will  ought  to  disappear  for  ever.  On  the 
contrary  one  is  tempted  to  follow  Imbart  cle  la  Tour, 
one  of  the  best  modern  historians  of  Roman  Catholi¬ 
cism,  and  describe  Luther  as  the  enfant  terrible  of 
mysticism.  Luther  has  drawn  the  conclusions  from 
the  sacred  experience  of  Pauline  mysticism  as  to  the 
pitiful  incapacity  of  human  reason  and  the  human 
will  when  the  salvation  of  the  soul  is  concerned. 
Peace,  nothing  else,  nothing  less,  was  what  Luther 
desired.  Painful  experience  taught  him  that  salva¬ 
tion  and  peace  are  entirely  God’s  gifts.  He  removed 
the  metayage  between  God  and  the  soul.  God  is 
everything,  man  nothing. 


60 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


We  recognize  the  eonsummator  of  St.  Paul  and  St. 
Augustine.  Luther  belongs  to  mediaeval  Mysticism  in 
the  same  way  that  St.  Paul  belongs  to  Pharisaism. 
He  is  a  spiritual  son  of  the  deep  devotion  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  which  nourished  his  soul  with  its  fruits 
throughout  life.  The  background  of  Luther’s  “De 
Libertate  Christiana”  (1520)  still  consists  of  the 
Platonic-mystical  dualism  of  soul  and  body,  spirit 
and  matter.  In  her  spiritual  existence  the  soul  is 
free  and  happy,  but  she  is  constrained  by  the  body  to 
concern  herself  with  mankind  and  the  world.  Thus 
she  must  in  charity  be  the  servant  of  all.  The  same 
antithesis  was  stated  by  Augustine.  But  against  this 
background  are  drawn  the  outlines  of  quite  a  dif¬ 
ferent  religious  character,  its  chief  features  being 
blissful  trust  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  fidelity 
to  the  earthly  calling. 

The  Originality  of  Ignatius  Loyola 

It  is  perhaps  less  universally  recognized  that  Igna¬ 
tius  Loyola  meant  a  new  start  as  well  as  Luther. 
That  great  son  of  passionate  Spanish  devotion  gave 
to  Romanism  a  new  inspiring  genius.  We  may  try 
to  define  his  relative  originality  under  two  heads — 
spiritual  exercise  and  zeal  for  the  Church  as  an 
institution. 

When  the  ideal  of  mysticism  has  attained  a  certain 
degree  of  independent  life,  its  characteristic  feature 
is  a  careful  self-training  in  the  methods  of  asceticism. 
By  means  of  “exercise”  ( askesis )  the  soul  wins  its 
way  from  one  state  to  another.  In  Western  Chris- 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  61 


tianity,  as  earlier  in  India,  Persia,  and  the  Hellenistic 
world,  a  series  of  measures  based  on  psychological 
experience  was  skilfully  arranged  to  dispose  the  mind 
towards  the  mood  required,  to  purify  and  prepare  it 
for  spiritual  sensations,  which  nevertheless  were  ac¬ 
counted  by  all  sound  mystics  as  gifts  of  divine  grace, 
not  as  works  of  man. 

After  Loyola’s  life  of  chivalry  had  been  checked 
by  sickness,  he  became  inflamed  by  a  desire  to  live 
for  God.  But  his  unquenchable  activity  was  set  in 
relief  by  visions  and  spiritual  experiences,  gradually 
systematized  into  strict  methods.  The  training  of  the 
soul  has  nowhere  been  conducted  with  more  profes¬ 
sional  skill  than  in  Loyola’s  “ Exerciiia  Spiritualia.” 
No  educational  genius  has  ever  attained  his  goal  with 
precision  superior  to  his.  The  free  growth  of  re¬ 
ligious  life  is  allowed  no  scope.  The  soul  progresses 
through  mortifications  and  other  measures  to  favour 
vivid  apprehension  of  different  religious  states,  along 
the  path  of  imagination  to  encounter  death,  to  visit 
heaven  and  hell. 

Loyola’s  originality  rests  not  alone  upon  his  talents 
for  regulating  the  mystical  self-training.  There  is 
far  more  importance  in  the  goal  he  was  aiming  at  in 
this  training.  All  this  cast-iron  austerity  of  exercise, 
unconditionally  and  slavishly  submitting  to  rules  and 
superiors,  became  directed  to  an  independent  external 
object,  which  grants  also  personal  salvation  and  com¬ 
munion  with  God — the  power  of  the  Church.  Both 
personal  will  and  personal  conviction  alike  must  be 
annihilated  in  order  that  the  individual  might  be  a 
supple  tool  for  the  domination  of  the  Church. 


62 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Wrought  to  a  perfect  instrument  the  will  is  entirely 
devoted  to  the  service  of  the  sacred  hierarchy.  You 
must  call  an  object  white  with  the  Church,  even  if 
you  find  it  evidently  black.  The  general  of  the  order 
holds  God’s  position:  locum  Dei  tenens,  he  is  God’s 
lieutenant  in  the  company. 

By  the  severe  subordination  of  will  and  visions  and 
oneditations  and  the  whole  apparatus  of  mysticism 
to  the  claims  of  the  Church,  a  relatively  new  creation 
came  into  being.  By  this  combination  of  methodical 
mysticism  with  enthusiastic  submission  to  the  Church 
as  an  institution,  the  “Spanish  priest,”  or  the  re¬ 
ligious  type  of  the  Jesuit,  was  separated  almost  as 
sharply  as  Luther  from  the  Middle  Ages.  In  Luther 
utter  incapacity  and  servitude  of  the  human  will  pre¬ 
vailed  until  God  redeemed  it  and  created  the  new, 
free  man  in  Christ.  In  Loyola  there  was  high  appre¬ 
ciation  of  the  human  will,  its  heroic  training,  and 
extinction  of  personal  independence  for  the  benefit  of 
the  holy  institution.  Never  has  institutionalism  been 
sublimated  in  a  more  glowing  heart. 

Comparison 

Both  are  genuine  mystics.  The  soul  is  tormented 
by  the  absence  from  God — everything  else — suffering 
and  sin — get  their  bitterness  in  so  far  as  they  alienate 
from  God.  The  only  good  and  meaning  of  existence 
is  union  with  God.  But  Luther  and  Loyola  conceive 
that  absence,  the  approach,  the  union,  its  cause,  its 
aim,  in  different  ways. 

Ignatius  felt  pangfully  the  distance  between 
worldly  strivings  and  a  life  in  renunciation.  His 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  63 


ambition  was  moved  by  such  examples  as  St.  Francis 
and  St.  Dominic.  The  distance  was  overcome  by  an 
accomplished  psychological  strategy  consisting  in  a 
long  and  manifold  series  of  self-training  exercises, 
visions  and  spiritual  states. 

To  Luther  the  distance  was  due  only  to  lack  of 
confidence,  due  to  the  sense  of  guilt  and  anguish. 
His  only  ambition  was  to  get  rid  of  that  separation. 
Its  only  remedy  is  God’s  love,  awakening  trust  in  the 
frightened  heart.  The  methodical  self-training  used 
by  him  without  result  in  the  monastery  was  incom¬ 
patible  with  a  religious  view,  dominated  by  the 
antithesis  of  guilt  and  grace,  and  by  the  overpower¬ 
ing  nearness  and  might  of  God.  The  man  whose 
heaven  is  to  feel  the  embrace  of  the  forgiving  love 
of  God  cannot  conceive  of  an  endeavour  to  ascend 
from  one  state  to  another  by  tried  ascetic  measures. 
“  Where  the  forgiveness  of  sin  is,  there  are  also  life 
and  bliss.”  Luther  knew  too  well  the  infernal  pangs 
of  self-torture  and  of  an  anguished  conscience  to 
think  a  moment  of  training  himself  for  a  renewed 
visit  in  death  or  hell.  And  to  heaven  he  was  trans¬ 
ported  by  God’s  grace  in  Christ,  not  by  his  own  will 
power  nor  by  any  system  of  psychology. 

Luther  despised  self-training  in  an  unpedagogical 
idealism,  which  has  in  many  less  pathetic  minds 
amongst  his  followers  shown  its  caricature  in  spiritual 
laziness.  His  reason  was  the  same  as  that  which  made 
the  Master  severe  against  everything  artificial,  against 
affected  piety  and  virtuosite  in  religion.  Trust  in 
God  meant  to  his  sensible  heart  eternal  life  and  the 
highest  heaven.  “Much  is  written  about  how  man  is 


64 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


to  become  godlike;  then  they  have  made  ladders  on 
which  one  ascends  to  heaven.  But  this  is  mere  patch- 
work.  Here,  however,  is  indicated  the  right  and 
nearest  path  to  ascend,  that  yon  become  full,  full  of 
God,  that  you  should  not  be  lacking  in  any  respect, 
but  that  you  have  everything  in  one  heap,  that  all 
your  speaking,  thinking,  going,  in  sum,  your  whole 
life,  becomes  quite  godlike.” 

The  difference  between  the  soul’s  free  intercourse 
with  God  and  the  methodical  training  for  experienc¬ 
ing  the  divine  has  never  been  more  striking  than  in 
those  two  great  men.  In  Luther  everything  is  spon¬ 
taneous;  with  Loyola  everything  is  calculated.  Read 
their  letters.  To  men  as  well  as  to  God  Luther  lets 
his  tender  or  passionate  heart  speak  with  a  touching 
and  ruthless  sincerity.  Loyola  warns  his  friends  for 
writing  freely  without  precautions.  One  must  care¬ 
fully  hide  several  things  on  special  scraps  of  paper 
and  not  write  them  in  the  ordinary  letter  itself. 
Luther  does  not  hide  anything.  Loyola  applies  strict 
method  to  everything  in  religion.  Luther  loves  truth 
and  nature  so  fanatically  that  he  is  afraid  of  method, 
or  indeed  he  is  so  entirely  occupied  and  overwhelmed 
by  God  that  there  is  no  place  for  calculated  train¬ 
ing. 

Luther,  as  radically  as  any  of  the  mystics,  made 
heaven  the  sphere  of  the  soul’s  existence,  but  he  did 
it  in  the  spirit  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  Augustine.  How¬ 
ever  transcendentally  Luther  experienced  and  valued 
the  soul’s  joy  in  God,  he  never  left  behind  him  the 
faithful  confidence  of  the  Gospel.  As  to  the  aim, 
Loyola  saw  it  in  the  Church  with  its  whole  apparatus 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  65 


and  authority.  The  unflinching  self-denial  benefits 
the  institution.  Luther  became  more  true  to  mys¬ 
ticism  than  that  admirable  Spanish  knight  in  a 
monk’s  dress,  inasmuch  as  Luther’s  goal  was  never 
planted  in  an  institution  but  in  the  salvation  of  the 
soul  and  its  eternal  life,  to  be  enjoyed  in  trustful 
fidelity  to  the  divine  service  of  the  daily  calling. 

The  wide  dissimilarity  between  them  appears  also 
in  the  final  remedies  which  they  found.  Loyola  got 
divine  assurance  in  visions  and  the  utmost  exertion 
of  his  resolute  will.  Luther  found  security  in  the 
Word,  in  something  objective,  in  the  revelation  of 
God  in  history. 

To  a  religious  hero  such  as  Luther  the  drama  of 
the  inner  life  expressed  itself  with  an  exceeding 
power  that  few  religious  people  can  adopt  without 
incurring  fancifulness  or  artificiality.  But  the  real 
thing  is  the  same  in  them  as  in  him.  A  characteristic 
trend  of  Christian  communion  with  God  appeared  in 
Luther  showing  its  real  nature  and  aim  with  unmis¬ 
takable  lucidity  and  imposing  force.  In  Luther  this 
peculiar  form  of  unworldliness  and  spirituality  asserts 
itself  in  a  new  evidence;  although  it  had  existed  in 
germ  before,  it  was  destined  after  Luther  to  develop 
its  whole  contents.  Such  were  the  tendencies,  incar¬ 
nated  in  two  mighty  religious  minds,  which  differen¬ 
tiated  Western  Christendom  into  divisions  in  the 
sixteenth  century. 

Institutionalism  and  Spiritual  Renewal 

To  sum  up.  Judaism  issued  from  a  creative  spirit, 
from  original  religious  life;  so  too  Christianity,  and 


66 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


so  too  the  Reformation.  But  the  soul  needs  a  body. 
The  religious  institution  existed.  If  no  such  form 
exists  it  is  created.  If  the  body  of  the  religious  com¬ 
munity  cannot  bear  the  new  life,  it  collapses  and  a 
new  organism  arises.  For  it  too  the  hour  comes  when 
the  form,  the  institution,  the  ecclesiastical  establish¬ 
ment  is  no  longer  a  home  where  the  spirit  can  live 
free,  but  a  prison  which  encloses  and  chokes  the 
spirit.  Personal  religion  becomes  institutional.  The 
religion  of  the  spirit  becomes  statutory  piety  in  one 
form  or  another. 

This  has  happened  in  post-Reformation  Chris¬ 
tianity.  We  see  instances  of  new  life  penetrating 
larger  or  smaller  parts  of  Christendom  without  these 
separating  into  new  communities.  I  may  mention 
Pietism,  Schleiermacher ’s  interpretations,  and  modern 
theological  research,  which  has  not  stopped  before 
any  confessional  frontiers,  but  has  penetrated  the 
spiritually  alert  and  the  intellectually  authoritative 
in  almost  every  Christian  community,1  but  which,  in 
spite  of  attempts  and  threats  from  one  quarter  and 
sectarian  denial  from  another,  has  fortunately  been 
unable  so  far  to  produce  a  new,  great  outward  divi¬ 
sion  of  the  Church.  Where  such  difference  has  torn 
a  communion  asunder,  it  is  now  striving  once  more 
for  unity.  It  was  supposed  that  German  Christen¬ 
dom,  if  not  held  together  by  connection  with  the 
State,  would  break  and  divide  between  Orthodoxy 

i  Let  me  refer  to  the  admirable  statements  made  by  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  to  the  Canterbury  Convocation  and 
by  Bishop  Gore  to  the  Conference  on  Scripture  teaching  in 
1922. 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  67 


and  Modernism.  Such  prophecies  have  been  put  to 
shame  in  the  most  conspicuous  way.  The  Church, 
being  deprived  of  its  material  support,  has  achieved 
what  was  impossible  in  the  days  of  prosperity; 
namely,  the  Kirchenbund,  a  confederation  of  all  Ger¬ 
man  Churchmen  solemnly  established  in  Wittenberg 
on  Ascension  Day,  1922.  Catholic  modernism,  ill- 
treated  by  Rome,  but  in  its  essence  a  true  and  noble 
offspring  of  Catholic  mysticism  not  imbued  by  a 
Protestant  spirit,  has  not  formed  any  separate  com¬ 
munities.1 


John  Wesley 

I  will  only  mention  the  most  important  cleavage 
that  took  place  after  the  Reformation,  when  the  insti¬ 
tution,  the  Church,  was  not  able  entirely  to  take  in 
fresh  spiritual  life.  I  refer  to  Methodism,  which 
arose  in  England,  under  the  leadership  of  John 
Wesley,  but  which  is  equally  characteristic  in  North 
America  and  fully  developed  there,  as  Lutheranism, 
which  arose  in  Germany,  has  become  in  Scandinavia. 
John  Wesley  was  not  a  creative  religious  genius  like 
Luther  or  Loyola,  but  he  received  his  new  religious 
freedom  and  joy  from  Luther.  Methodism  is,  as  we 
shall  see,  the  most  important  shoot  on  Anglo-Saxon 
soil  of  the  certainty  of  salvation  and  religion  of  trust 
newly  acquired  through  Luther,  if  we  pay  attention 
not  to  its  organizing  eagerness  and  skill  but  to  its 
religious  content.  When  Methodist  communities  arise 
among  us  in  Scandinavia,  it  is  as  when  we  used  to 

I I  may  refer  to  my  book,  Religionsproblemet  i  Katolicism 
och  Protestantism Stockholm,  1910. 


68 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


buy  our  whortleberries  back  from  Germany  in  the 
form  of  wine. 

Methodism  was  in  the  first  place  what  its  nick¬ 
name  (which  has  become  a  term  of  honour)  denotes. 
John  Wesley  relates  in  “A  Short  History  of 
Methodism’ ’  (London,  1765),  how  in  November,  1729, 
he  and  his  brother  Charles  and  two  other  Oxford 
students  came  together  to  study  the  Bible  in  Greek 
and  to  observe  their  Christian  and  civic  duties  with 
greater  strictness.  No  doubt  they  preferred  to  be 
called  Bible  Christians.  They  were  quite  conscious 
of  their  scrupulous  observance  of  the  claims  of  re¬ 
ligion  in  great  and  small  things,  ceremonies  and  con¬ 
duct.  John  Wesley  in  “Advice  to  the  People  Called 
Methodists”  (1775),  gives  strictness  of  life  as  one  of 
their  characteristics.  This  is  the  external  side  of 
Methodism,  its  technique,  which  contributed  to  its 
success,  and  which  was  part  of  John  Wesley’s  strange 
gifts.  His  ability  to  organize  religious  conduct  by 
rules  and  control  in  individuals  and  the  community 
was  as  effective  for  his  success  as  his  rare  power  of 
speaking  and  writing,  simply,  briefly,  in  a  prosaic 
but  effective  matter-of-fact  way,  straight  to  the  point, 
vividly  and  concretely.  In  this  our  Swedish  P.  P. 
Waldenstrom  resembled  him. 

But  Methodism  has  a  soul  too — a  warm  and  rich 
soul  within  its  forms.  Something  remarkable  occurred 
to  this  man  who,  with  his  friends,  made  up  his  mind 
and  began  to  take  Christianity  seriously.  We  shall 
let  John  Wesley  relate  this.  See  his  “Answer  to  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Church’s  Remarks  on  the  Rev.  Mr.  John 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  69 


Wesley’s  Last  Journal”  (1744) .  There  he  quotes  from 
his  diary:  “After  we  had  wander’d  many  years,  in 
the  new  path  of  salvation  by  faith  and  works,  about 
two  years  ago  it  pleased  God,  to  shew  us  the  old  way, 
of  salvation  by  faith  only.”  Here  we  hear  an  Anglo- 
Saxon  echo  of  Luther’s  sola  fides,  “the  faith  alone.” 
As  with  Luther,  mediaeval  mysticism  had  prepared 
Wesley’s  soul  too.  “By  God’s  Providence”  the 
“Imitatio,”  the  book  on  the  imitation  of  Christ,  had 
previously  fallen  into  his  hands  as  had  the  writings 
of  Francis  de  Sales. 

October  of  1735  is  as  important  in  the  rise  of 
Methodism  as  the  above-mentioned  November  of  1729, 
for  then  John  W esley  went  to  America.  On  the  ship 
there  was  a  band  of  German  Moravians  or  so-called 
Bohemian  or  Moravian  brothers,  who  had  been  driven 
from  Moravia  because  of  their  faith.  Amid  storms 
and  general  panic  Wesley  admired  their  confidence. 
He  soon  found  the  explanation  in  their  firm  belief  in 
justification  by  faith  and  in  their  assurance  of  their 
present  pardon  and  salvation,  which  his  faith,  anx¬ 
iously  mingled  with  the  doctrine  of  good  works,  did 
not  feel.  In  America  he  met  Spangenberg.  The 
community  of  Brethren  had  revived  Luther’s  religious 
experience,  with  curious  additions.  “The  full  assur¬ 
ance  of  faith  I  had  not  yet,  nor  for  the  two  years 
I  continued  in  Moravia.  Here  after  some  time  it 
pleas’d  our  Lord  to  manifest  Himself  more  clearly 
to  my  soul ;  and  give  me  that  full  sense  of  acceptance 
in  Him,  which  excludes  all  doubt  and  fear”  (“The 
Principles  of  a  Methodist,”  1747).  Wesley’s  religious 


70 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


liberation  to  Evangelic  trust  was  completed  when 
on  May  24,  1738,  he  heard  Luther  himself.  His 
preface  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  was  read  in  a 
circle  in  London.  He  related  to  those  present  what 
he  felt.  We  have  already  heard  his  subsequent 
description  of  the  change  brought  about  in  his  divine 
intercourse  that  day  in  London. 

The  fact  that  Moravian  believers  transmitted  to 
him  Luther's  religious  insight  as  to  sola  fides,  “the 
faith”  or  “the  trust  alone,”  which  is  the  acuminated 
expression  of  Evangelic  piety,1  did  not  cloud  Wes¬ 
ley’s  views.  In  the  above-mentioned  “Answer  to  Rev. 
Mr.  Church”  he  gives  an  exact  account  of  the  exag¬ 
gerations  that  Moravianism  or  Zinzendorf  was  guilty 
of.  Wesley’s  bent  was  rather  in  the  opposite  di¬ 
rection.  Thus  we  find  in  “Advice  to  the  People 
Called  Methodists”  (1751,  dated  1745),  the  realiza¬ 
tion  of  the  fact  that  no  group  in  the  whole  of  Chris¬ 
tendom  is  so  careful  about  its  principles  as  the 
Methodists,  no  group  is  so  eager  about  the  necessity 
for  thorough  sanctification,  none  attaches  such  impor¬ 
tance  to  a  careful  observance  of  the  rules  of  divine 
service  and  of  life,  and  so  on. 

In  John  Wesley  there  welled  forth  a  fresh  wave  of 
spiritual,  evangelic  experience.  It  is  a  notable  fact 
that,  like  Luther  and  Paul,  he  was  misunderstood  in 
his  rejection  of  every  statutory  barrier  before  the 
open  sanctuary  of  God’s  grace.  Like  Paul  and 

i  See  my  book,  “ Humor  och  Melankoli  och  andra  Luther- 
studier  ”  pp.  309  ff. 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  71 

Luther  he  had  to  oppose  antinomians,  such  as  Ralph 
C’ud worth  and  James  Bellv. 

V 

The  Anglican  priest,  John  Wesley,  was  a  faithful 
son  of  the  Church  in  England.  She  had  at  that  time 
no  one  more  devoted  than  he :  scarcely  anv  one  better 
equipped  than  he.  Wesley  did  not  think  of  forming 
anv  new  religious  community;  onlv  of  organizing 

»  v  7  i/  C?  CT 

religious  life.  In  ;‘The  Character  of  a  Methodist” 
(1763  he  mentions  twelve  characteristics,  but  rejects 
the  idea  that  Methodists  should  be  separated  from 
others  by  any  views,  ceremonies,  or  any  special  point. 
There  is  no  proof  that  he  had  “  formed  special  soci¬ 
eties  against  the  Church."  In  1768  he  issued  the 
warning:  That  they  who  leave  the  Church  leave  the 
Methodists  too.  In  1786  he  contended  that  everv- 

V 

thing  that  had  been  done  in  America  or  Scotland  was 
no  separation  from  the  English  Church. 

With  regard  to  the  momentous  importance  of 
Methodism  on  the  condition  of  the  whole  of  Eng¬ 
land.  even  outside  the  purely  religious  and  moral 
sphere,  we  are  told  in  J.  Vernon  Bartlet’s  and  A.  J. 
Carlvle’s  ;;  Christianitv  in  Historv“  that  in  several 

•r  V  ► 

respects  the  Methodist  movement  became  for  Eng¬ 
land  what  the  Revolution  became  later  for  France. 
‘‘It  emancipated  the  individual,  it  represented  the 
principle  of  equality,  and  taught  men  the  meaning 
of  brotherhood." 

Methodism  was  thus  in  the  Church  in  England 
an  evangelic  renewal,  translated  from  Luther’s  faith 
into  zeal  for  revival,  moral  enthusiasm,  and  method¬ 
ical  enterprise.  During  his  long  life  until  1791 


72 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


John  Wesley  succeeded  in  keeping  the  movement 
within  the  Church.  But  the  Church  was  too  inert. 
It  did  not  let  itself  be  permeated.  And  what  was 
still  more  unwise,  it  caused  the  separation  of  Meth¬ 
odism,  so  that  it  became  a  new  religious  community 
by  the  side  of  the  mother  Church.  The  same  lack  of 
wisdom  in  the  Church  has  contributed  in  Sweden  to 
the  tendency  to  separation  in  the  religious  movement 
issuing  from  Waldenstrom.  After  Wesley’s  death  his 
own  preachers  helped  in  the  change  by  which  Meth¬ 
odism  passed  from  a  religious  society  into  a  separate 
community.  But  an  essential  part  of  Methodism  re¬ 
mained  inside  the  Church,  permeating  it  and  having 
a  blessed  effect.  In  the  Church  of  England  it  has 
been  called,  even  in  our  days,  “the  kernel  of  Evan¬ 
gelic  Christianity.” 

What  is  Methodism?  Is  it  Anglican,  Lutheran  or 
Reformed?  The  question  cannot  be  answered.  Or 
more  correctly,  all  three  questions  can  be  answered 
in  the  affirmative — a  proof  of  the  unity  of  Evan¬ 
gelic  Christianity  in  the  spirit.  On  the  whole,  how¬ 
ever,  we  are  concerned  here  too  with  the  same  his¬ 
torical  course  of  development.  A  prophetic  person¬ 
ality  or  a  soul  moved  by  the  Gospel  tries  to  infuse 
new  life  into  the  religious  community  which  has  be¬ 
come  lethargic  and  has  half  forgotten  the  genuine 
tones  of  religion,  but  the  official  leaders  are  dis¬ 
couraging.  Division  threatens  or  occurs.  Both  sides 
may  be  to  blame.  In  the  history  of  religion  this 
is  the  most  important  form  of  division  in  the  Church. 
Strong  religious  forces  are  put  outside  the  Church 
because  she  cannot  suffer  them. 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  73 


THOSE  WHO  WENT  OUT 

Separation  may  have  quite  an  opposite  cause.  A 
group  departs  from  the  historical  communion  in 
order  to  fulfil  better  the  Master’s  commandments. 

Because  They  Found  the  Church  Worldly  and  Sinful 

The  Church  gets  on  so  well  in  the  world  that  she 
materializes  herself.  Evil  spirits  enter  into  the  com¬ 
munion,  the  spirit  of  the  world,  even  the  spirit  of 
schism.  The  Pauline  Epistles  already  testify  to  this. 
Certain  exacting  spirits  find  the  Church  unholy  and 
leave  her  external  communion  to  form  a  communion 
of  the  holy.  The  Church  is  ungodly.  We  wish  to  be 
godly.  The  Church  receives  practically  anybody  in 
its  bosom.  We  wish  to  be  a  congregation  of  none 
but  the  faithful. 

Free  associations  have  felt  the  need  of  leaving  the 
Church  for  the  sake  of  their  salvation.  To  them  she 
has  become  a  Babel,  nay,  a  Sodom.  The  Franciscan 
spiritualists  called  the  Pope  Antichrist  long  before 
Luther,  and  the  mediaeval  zealots  could  not  find 
words  strong  enough  to  condemn  the  decadence  of 
the  Church.  But  they  did  not  separate ;  at  most  they 
finished  at  the  stake. 

Within  Evangelic  Christendom  such  tension  has 
often  caused  schism.  Many  such  groups  consider  the 
existence  of  the  Church  unjustified  from  a  strictly 
Christian  point  of  view.  Others  have  gradually — 
not  without  a  regeneration  of  the  spiritual  life  of 
the  Church — learned  to  see  in  the  Church  a  useful 


74  CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 

and  proper  qualification  for  separate,  free  Christian 
activity. 

Examples  of  separatism  in  consequence  of  the 
worldliness  of  the  Church,  its  connection  with  the 
state,  and  its  spiritual  lethargy  are  seen  in  the  Scot¬ 
tish  Free  Church,  now  well  on  its  way  to  reunite  with 
the  national  Church  after  its  useful  reorganization 
with  increased  self-government.  In  the  main,  two 
ecclesiastical  ideals  are  opposed  here:  the  national 
Church  and  the  corporate  Church ;  or  two  other 
ideals:  the  strongly  centralized  communion  and  the 
congregational  type,  composed  of  relatively  inde¬ 
pendent  congregations. 

Because  They  Disapproved  of  Doctrines  and  Rites  in 

the  Church 

They  find,  perhaps  in  addition,  that  the  Church  is 
in  error.  They  depart  with  the  intention  of  better 
maintaining  the  doctrine  of  Holy  Writ  on  a  certain 
point.  As  a  rule  such  separations  start  out  from  a 
more  literal  application  of  the  New  Testament  (some¬ 
times  also  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  is  in  the  case  with 
the  Seventh  Day  Adventists,  who  wish  to  make  the 
Sabbath  their  day  of  rest).  The  chief  example  of 
separation  in  consequence  of  some  special  doctrine 
and  practice  is  shown  by  the  Baptists,  who  in  the 
baptism  of  believers  see  a  guarantee  that  the  congre¬ 
gation  contains  only  personally  decided  and  believing 
Christians,  thus  combining  the  ideal  of  a  corporation 
of  exclusively  true  believers  with  a  literal  adminis¬ 
tration  of  the  baptism  of  adults  as  in  the  New  Testa¬ 
ment. 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  75 


Reality  is  richer  and  has  more  nuances  than  onr 
distinctions.  Sometimes  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  de¬ 
cide  whether  a  group  has  separated  for  reasons  of 
principle,  or  a  schism  has  arisen  in  other  ways.  And 
indeed  it  is  often  difficult  to  state  whether  a  sectarian 
idea  prevailed  at  the  separation,  or  whether  division 
took  place  in  spite  of  a  confessed  adherence  to  the 
ideal  of  Church  unity,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  scholarly 
contribution  given  by  Newman  Smyth  and  Williston 
"Walker  to  Church  unity. 1 

The  history  of  separations  contains  edifying  fea¬ 
tures  of  Christian  zeal.  An  ardent  spirit,  a  living 
apostolic  faith  and  love,  have  not  infrequently  in¬ 
spired  the  groups  that  have  not  thrived  in  ecclesi¬ 
astical  coldness  and  routine.  The  men  who  have  hap¬ 
pened  to  be  leaders  of  the  Church  have  often  treated 
budding  life  and  spiritual  revival  with  a  callousness 
or  unwisdom  that  pains  the  heart  to  think  of,  but, 
there  is  also  often  Pharisaism  in  separation. 

One  is  easily  tempted  to  apply  to  modern  condi¬ 
tions  what  from  entirely  different  historical  sur¬ 
roundings  is  related  in  the  New  Testament  about  the 
first  Christian  congregations.  In  doing  so  we  not 
only  commit  a  fatal  anachronism,  but  we  also  make 
a  law  of  the  oldest  Christian  conditions  in  a  way  that 
offends  against  Paul’s  view,  that  the  letter  killeth 
but  the  Spirit  giveth  life. 

Here  and  there  Paul  had  friends  and  groups  of 
friends  whom  we  call  his  congregations.  If  we  take 
the  group  at  Corinth,  it  caused  him  especially  great 

1  “Approaches  Towards  Church  Unity,”  Yale  University 
Press,  1919. 


76 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


trouble.  Suppose  that  Paul  had  been  able  to  choose 
either  a  cathedral  and  several  other  sanctuaries,  the 
religious  instruction  that  all  children  and  adults  had 
to  go  through  at  Corinth,  and  so  on,  or  the  small 
group  about  which  we  read  in  his  Epistles.  Can  any 
one  doubt  his  choice?  For  my  part  I  do  not  think 
that  he  would  have  abandoned  the  comprehensive 
community  in  order  to  form  a  little  group  of  his  own. 
This  is  only  my  supposition.  And  I  say  this  in  order 
to  show  to  some  extent  why  I  and  many  others  look 
upon  our  service  in  the  Church  as  a  sacred  task  im¬ 
posed  by  God  in  accordance  with  the  principles  of 
the  Gospel. 

Because  the  Church  Did  Not  Always  Grant  Necessary 

Freedom 

A  vigorous  organism  consists  of  many  small  cells, 
which  may  have  a  more  or  less  independent  existence 
in  relation  to  the  whole.  It  is  only  injurious  to  both 
parts  if  they  are  completely  isolated.  The  small, 
fervent  groups  of  believers  that  assemble  around  the 
Word  and  prayer  are  thus  useful  and  necessary 
within  the  Church  as  a  whole,  whether  as  in  Evan¬ 
gelic  Christianity  they  take  the  form  of  a  large 
number  of  communions  and  associations,  or,  as  in  the 
Roman  part  of  Christianity,  they  appear  as  monastic 
or  nuns’  orders,  quite  as  in  the  Indian  religion.  As 
a  rule  such  orders  really  differ  from  one  another  and 
have  in  ecclesiastical  history  been  ill-disposed  to  one 
another  at  least  as  much  as  the  different  divisions  of 
Evangelic  Christianity.  For  my  own  part  I  should 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  77 

go  a  step  farther  and  say  that  the  free  associations 
are  necessary. 

Much  voluntary  Christian  activity  belongs  directly 
to  the  work  of  the  Church.  She  may  have  her  own 
mission,  her  associations  of  young  people,  her  congre¬ 
gational  circles,  her  works  of  charity,  her  training 
institutions  in  deaconess  homes,  Samaritan  homes  and 
deacon  (Acts  6)  homes.  The  Evangelic  diaconia 
(service)  is  sometimes  organically  connected  with  the 
office  and  administration  of  the  Church ;  sometimes 
not.  In  the  latter  case  the  diaconia  belongs  to  a 
society  which,  like  most  missionary  societies,  Young 
Men’s  and  Young  Women’s  Christian  Associations, 
the  Salvation  Army,  the  Student  Movement  and 
many  other  unions  and  activities,  quite  naturally 
acknowledge  the  Church  and  her  justification  and 
live  their  more  or  less  independent  life  within  her 
dominion,  as  in  a  common  spiritual  fatherland.  If 
they  were  to  form  anything  resembling  a  religious 
community  of  their  own,  they  would  prove  false  to 
their  fundamental  idea. 

In  Evangelic  Christendom  the  free  associations 
agree  with  the  idea  of  the  universal  priesthood  of  all 
believers  and  are  an  incalculable  source  of  spiritual 
strength. 

It  seems  to  me  wrong  if  the  Church  is  exclusive  and 
refuses  to  acknowledge  voluntary  work  and  the  sepa¬ 
rate  religious  associations.  It  also  seems  wrong  if 
such  separate  Christian  groups  are  exclusive  and 
refuse  to  acknowledge  the  Church.  Many  years  ago 
an  English  bishop  used  an  illustration  taken  from 
warfare.  I  quote  it,  although  all  illustrations  taken 


78 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


from  the  war  have  now  become  repulsive  to  us.  He 
compared  the  Salvation  Army  to  the  light,  mobile 
cavalry.  Then  come  the  different  associations  and 
religious  communions,  big  and  small.  But  if  there  is 
to  be  any  lasting  victory  and  possession,  the  great 
mass  of  the  infantry  is  needed.  In  the  last  resort  it 
is  the  Church  that  we  depend  on. 

Owing  to  mutual  failings,  callousness,  and  perhaps 
chiefly,  nay,  exclusively,  to  the  inability  of  the 
Church  to  recognize  the  voice  of  the  Spirit,  perhaps 
also  to  ignorance  and  arrogance  in  the  free  associa¬ 
tions,  it  has,  however,  happened — would  to  God  it 
wrere  otherwise — that  such  free  groups  for  common 
edification  and  common  Christian  work  have  been — 
or  have  felt  themselves — placed  in  an  external  sense 
outside  the  bounds  of  the  Church,  although  from  the 
beginning  they  never  had  any  idea  of  separation. 


in 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM 

(Continued) 


in 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM 

(Continued) 

NATIONS  AS  RELIGIOUS  UNITS 

WE  really  need  not  count  the  national 
Churches  as  separations,  for  even  the  un¬ 
divided  Roman  Christendom  of  the  West 
began  in  certain  quarters,  when  national  conscious¬ 
ness  was  aroused  in  the  fifteenth  century,  to  assume 
the  character  of  national  Churches,  and  since  then  it 
has  done  still  more  so  in  the  arch-catholic  countries. 
A  tendency  towards  independence  and  national  dig¬ 
nity  against  the  dominion  of  Rome  has  appeared, 
especially  in  France,  the  foremost  Catholic  nation, 
and  has  there  created  Gallicanism.  Ever  since  Huss 
the  same  condition  has  been  among  the  Czechs,  whose 
independence  as  a  state  in  our  days  has  to  a  great 
extent  raised  the  demand  for  relative  ecclesiastical 
autonomy.  At  the  Church  Meeting  in  Constance, 
1414-18,  the  voting  was  by  nations.  The  peoples 
began  to  discover  their  individuality.  This  process 
was  hastened  by  the  religious  revival. 

Luther,  who  hated  the  formation  of  sects  and  who, 
with  his  concentration  on  the  Alpha  and  Omega  of 
religion,  the  peace  of  the  soul,  knew  very  well  that  too 
great  emphasis  on  the  external  institution,  whether 

it  was  Rome  or  a  group  of  Christians  expelled  from 

81 


82 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Rome,  might  easily  draw  the  mind  from  God’s  king¬ 
dom  to  worldly  calculation.  Luther  had  no  other  pos¬ 
sibility,  with  his  valuation  of  the  calls  of  civic  life, 
than  to  seek  a  framework  and  a  protection  for  the 
congregation  of  the  faithful  and  for  the  service  of 
the  Word  in  the  existing  organization  of  the  State; 
that  is,  in  the  princes  and  other  governing  bodies. 

Unfortunately,  on  account  of  this,  religion  became 
in  certain  cases  too  much  a  matter  for  the  powers 
that  be  and  too  little  a  matter  for  the  people.  Cuius 
regio,  eius  religio  was  applied  by  the  Evangelic 
authorities  just  as  well  as  by  the  Roman  Catholic 
princes,  even  if  the  former  never  exercised  violence 
like  that  of  the  contra-reformation. 

Sweden  was  one  of  the  exceptions.  After  well- 
intended  efforts  to  restore  the  Church  unity  of  the 
first  Christian  centuries,  through  King  John’s  mar¬ 
riage  with  a  Polish  princess,  his  son  and  successor  on 
the  throne  was  a  Roman  Catholic.  His  uncle,  the 
hope  of  the  national  party,  had  sympathies  for  a 
somewhat  Calvinizing  faith.  In  that  situation  the 
universal,  free  and  Christian  Council,  which  convened 
at  Upsala  on  February  25,  1593,  adopted  Lutheranism 
in  its  fullest  form.  “The  council,  bishops,  knights 
and  nobility,  priesthood  and  merchants  of  the  realm 
of  Sweden — as  well  spiritual  as  temporal”  (so  they 
are  termed  in  the  records),  sealed  an  alliance  in  the 
faith  for  themselves  and  their  successors.  John 
Wordsworth,  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  wrote  in  his 
excellent  Hale  lectures,  delivered  in  Chicago,  1910, 
on  “The  National  Church  of  Sweden”  (Mowbray, 
1911)  as  follows: 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  83 


“It  is  scarcely  possible  to  exaggerate  the  impor¬ 
tance  of  this  council  as  a  turning-point  in  the  history 
of  Sweden.  The  law  historians  of  the  country  have 
perhaps  hardly  realized  its  full  significance  and  its 
unique  character.  It  stands  out  as  evidence  of  what 
a  national  Church  may  do  for  the  people  when  it  is 
allowed  to  have  a  reasonable  independence.  There 
are  very  few,  if  any,  parallels  to  be  found  to  it  in  the 
religious  history  of  mankind.  The  freedom  and  the 
unanimity  of  the  action  could  only  be  possible  in  a 
nation  so  much  accustomed  to  the  idea  and  practice 
of  self-government  by  a  large  popular  assembly,  and 
so  ready  to  be  swayed  by  enthusiasm  in  making  great 
decisions  at  critical  moments  of  its  history.” 

Johannes  Rudbeekius,  the  great  bishop  of  Vasteras, 
said  in  1636:  “Ever  since  the  Reformation  our  re¬ 
ligion  has  been  ill-treated  in  Germany.  As  the  prince 
has  gone,  so  the  province  has  had  to  follow.  But, 
thanks  be  to  God,  we  have  here  stood  well  hitherto. 
If  the  government  ( magistratus )  has  desired  advance¬ 
ment,  the  clergy  have  kept  the  government  back.  The 
government  for  its  part  has  kept  the  clergy  in  its  eye 
for  the  last  hundred  years. — We  must  not  adopt  Ger¬ 
man  manners  if  we  wish  to  escape  their  ill-fortune 
and  avoid  the  peril  in  which  they  are.”  Now  that 
epoch  has  closed.  The  Church  in  Germany  sets  an 
example  to  all  of  us  in  its  independence  of  all  worldly 
supports  in  its  united  Life  and  Work  and  in  its  per¬ 
severing  and  faithful  energy. 

The  national  communions  are  geographical,  not  con¬ 
fessional  units.  The  Scottish  Church,  the  Swedish 
Church,  VEglise  de  France,  the  Church  of  England, 


84 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


the  Church  of  Finland  denote  regions  in  which  a  spe¬ 
cial  portion  of  Christendom  has,  first  of  all,  its  being, 
and,  secondly,  the  task  of  permeating  souls  and  the 
life  of  the  people  with  the  Gospel.  Thus  the  national 
communions  are  intended  to  be  provinces  of  Chris¬ 
tendom,  not  to  dismember  it.  The  right  name  is,  there¬ 
fore,  as  Dr.  Headlam  remarks,  the  Church  in  Sweden, 
in  England,  in  Denmark.  No  less  a  person  than  Gus- 
tavus  Adolphus  realized  this  with  admirable  clearness 
and  created  the  right  expression  when  he  spoke  of 
“the  majesty  of  the  realm  of  Sweden  and  God’s 
Church,  which  reposes  therein.”  He  did  not  think 
at  all  of  any  royal  majesty  but  of  the  majesty  of  the 
nation,  as  free  and  self-governing.  “King  and  estates, 
higher  as  well  as  lower,  form  together,  in  God’s  place, 
the  royal,  high  majesty,”  he  said  on  another  occasion. 
The  Church  of  God  was  to  him  the  soul,  the  very 
raison  d’etre,  of  the  Kingdom.  The  national  com¬ 
munions  have  territorial  or  national  or  linguistic 
frontiers.  But  this  is  no  schism.  It  ought  to  be  only 
a  necessary  and  useful  division  of  labour.  The  na¬ 
tional  communions  really  exist  in  the  Evangelic  sec¬ 
tion  of  Christendom.  But  when  the  same  feeling  for 
relative  independence  within  a  linguistic  region  or  a 
national  culture  has  manifested  itself  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  part  of  Christendom  too,  as  was  observed 
during  certain  periods  in  the  religious  history,  espe¬ 
cially  of  France  and  Bohemia,  such  a  national  indi¬ 
vidualization  of  the  idea  of  the  Church  has  not  been 
injurious  either  to  Christianity  or  to  spiritual  culture 
as  a  whole.  As  the  Catholic  preacher,  Pere  Hyacinthe, 
once  did,  so  it  has  happened  that  some  servants  of 


THE  DIVISIONS  OP  CHRISTENDOM  85 


the  Church  in  Prance  or  elsewhere  applied  to  the 
Church  in  Sweden  to  belong  by  consecration  or  other¬ 
wise  to  her  unbroken  historical  tradition  without, 
howTever,  formally  entering  her  nationally  limited 
service.  Sympathy  has  been  felt  for  the  Evangelic 
catholicity  that,  rightly  or  wrongly,  was  thought  to 
exist  in  our  Swedish  branch  of  Christendom.  Such 
requests  have  been  declined.  This  has  certainly 
meant  a  correct  application  of  the  principle  of  Evan¬ 
gelic  catholicity,  for  a  national  communion  must 
not  desire  to  separate  itself  into  a  sect  or,  as  a  re¬ 
ligious  community,  to  make  proselytes  from  the  ranks 
of  our  brethren  in  faith  in  other  national  com¬ 
munions.  We  have  a  special  mission  within  Evan¬ 
gelic  Christendom.  This  task  is  essentially  uni¬ 
versal,  but  our  call  concerns  the  children  of  Sweden 
and  the  mission  regions  of  Swedish  Christendom.  He 
who  wishes  to  serve  his  people  in  another  Christian 
country  is  referred  to  the  circle  of  our  co-religionists 
in  that  country. 

The  Church  is  to  be  the  nation’s  teacher.  She  has 
a  holy  task  in  the  nation  and  for  the  nation.  It  is 
true  that  the  Church  has  been  infected  by  national¬ 
ism,  nay,  she  has  sometimes  yielded  to  the  temptation 
to  idolize  paganly  the  authority  of  the  temporal  com¬ 
munity  and  its  policy.  The  name  of  the  State  Church 
is  consequently  not  at  a  premium  in  the  world.  It 
is  fashionable  to  despise  the  national  sections  of  the 
Church  or  the  national  religious  communities  in  com¬ 
parison  with  Rome  or  with  separated  communities. 
But  look  at  what  these  Evangelic  national  Churches, 


86 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


which  have  succeeded  the  civitas  Dei ,  the  cultural  In¬ 
stitution  of  the  Middle  Ages,  have  helped  to  carry  out 
in  the  sphere  of  religion  and  education.  It  is  useful 
to  read  Emile  de  Laveleye’s  book  on  this.  Not  in 
order  to  encourage  Protestant  self-righteousness,  but 
to  do  a  little  justice,  we  ought  to  remember  what 
our  despised  national  divisions  of  Evangelic  Chris¬ 
tianity  have  done  to  train  our  peoples  in  knowledge, 
in  a  feeling  of  responsibility  and  self-determination, 
and  in  human  existence.  Why  is  it  that  in  Switzerland 
certain  cantons  with  a  Romance  population  have  wide¬ 
spread  literacy  and  general  prosperity,  but  not  others 
of  the  same  race?  Why  is  it  that  in  Switzerland  the 
same  striking  difference  can  be  observed  between  can¬ 
tons  with  a  Germanic  population?  The  same  com¬ 
parison  strikes  us  in  looking  at  Holland  and  Belgium. 
It  is  not  a  question  of  blood  or  race  or  geographical 
and  historical  conditions,  but  simply  the  influence  of 
the  national  Evangelic  Church.  It  seems  to  me  more 
important  now  than  ever  to  emphasize  the  unity  of 
Christendom  and  for  the  sake  of  this  unity  let  that 
which  divides  sink  into  the  background.  But  what 
has  been  stated  is  a  necessary  tribute  to  truth,  as  it 
is  considered  modern  to  underestimate  the  achieve¬ 
ments  of  so-called  national  religion  which  certainly 
does  not  represent  Christian  faith  and  life  in  the 
highest  sense. 

Having  the  privilege  of  addressing  myself  pri¬ 
marily  to  American  readers  I  might  add  a  few  words 
on  (a)  national  communions  and  nationalism,  (b) 
relationship  between  State  and  Church — the  ideal  of 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  87 


a  national  Church,  and  Free  Church  ideals,  and  (c) 
on  the  religious  idea  underlying  the  national  Church. 

Church  and  Nationalism 

Does  not  the  Church  need  to  be  reminded  of  the 
Gospel  of  Christ,  of  Him,  Who  when  reminded  of  the 
blood  tie,  stretched  out  His  hand  and  said:  “He  who 
does  My  Father’s  will,  he  is  My  mother  and  My 
brother  and  My  sister”?  If  the  union  of  peoples  is 
to  be  real  the  irrational  idealism  of  such  a  thought 
must  be  sustained  by  a  faith  and  love  above  the  world. 
A  commonwealth  of  nations  deserving  such  a  high 
name  will  never  be  reached  by  calculation  and  by 
cautious  balancing  of  existing  interests.  When  in 
the  fifteenth  century  pagan  antiquity  revived  for 
good  and  evil,  pagan  views  obtained  fresh  reputation 
and  influence  in  politics.  It  was  revived  in  the  period 
of  the  Renaissance  especially  by  Machiavelli.  He 
reckoned  only  with  natural  man.  But  this  is  of  no 
avail;  the  Gospel  must  be  taken  into  consideration 
too.  A  Swedish  clergyman  suggested  that  the  name 
of  Jesus  should  be  put  beneath  the  document  of  the 
League  of  Nations,  if  it  could  become  worthy  of  such 
a  signature,  which  it  did  not.  No  one  can  fail  to 
realize  that  the  idea  of  unity  in  those  whom  it  inspires 
with  complete  earnestness  has  a  direct  Christian 
origin,  however  distorted  it  may  have  become,  resem¬ 
bling  a  sort  of  slave-owning  morality.  The  brother¬ 
hood  and  equality  of  mankind  can  only  be  derived 
from  the  Gospel,  for  this  ideal  becomes  powerless  and 
hopeless  if  it  does  not  acquire  its  possibility  and  sup- 


88 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


port  from  the  fatherhood  of  God,  from  the  certitude, 
possessed  by  suffering  love,  of  a  divine  mercy  and  a 
vital  will  which  is  on  its  way  among  mankind. 

But  then  the  aridity  and  false  pathos  of  bureau¬ 
cratic  State  religion  is  of  no  avail.  After  all  it  relies 
ultimately  on  human  strength.  Nor  is  the  self- 
satisfied  egoism  in  the  piety  of  separate  communities 
of  any  avail,  whether  the  community  is  small  or 
forms  a  great  clerical  institution.  Did  we  not  hear 
from  the  trenches  on  both  sides:  4 ‘We  don’t  care  any 
more  for  those  sermons  on  the  power  of  our  nation 
or  on  our  sacred  cause;  we  should  like  to  hear  a 
simple  message  about  the  Crucified  and  about  God’s 
mercy  ’  ’  ? 

In  all  countries  there  are  men  and  women  who 
understand  that  the  only  remedy  for  so  much  woe  is 
love — people  who  in  their  own  souls  feel  something 
of  the  secret  of  conciliation  and  who  are  therefore 
in  their  hearts  not  finely  or  cynically  proud,  but  peni¬ 
tent.  With  the  help  of  God  they  are  making  in  great 
and  small  things  the  most  difficult  of  all  efforts; 
namely,  to  be  able  to  forgive.  Such  Christians  in  all 
camps  and  countries  must  combine  and  with  prayer 
and  work  make  the  union  of  nations  more  than  a 
utopian  dream  or  a  bold  political  idea  or  a  carica¬ 
ture;  they  must  make  it  a  faith  that  moves  moun¬ 
tains. 

Nothing  less  will  do  than  that  the  Christian  faith 
shall  be  decisive  even  in  politics.  Now  that  world 
events  have  killed  the  unreal  optimism  that  saw  in 
front  of  it  a  steadily  ascending  evolution,  we  ought 
to  see  that  the  mediaeval  Church  formed  a  great  uni- 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  89 


versal  community,  which  afterwards  collapsed.  In 
the  long  run  mankind  cannot  do  without  something 
similar. 

The  universal  distress  has  given  a  blow  to  our  pride. 
We  are  perhaps  ready  to  recognize  the  greatness  of 
the  despised  Middle  Ages.  The  universal  State  which 
the  Church  then  claimed  to  be,  formed  in  principle 
a  higher  form  for  the  common  life  of  the  nations  than 
the  self-glory  and  balance  of  power  of  the  sovereign 
States. 

For  the  natural  man  the  temptation  is  certainly 
great  to  imagine  a  policy  which  wisely  produces  a 
state  of  equilibrium  by  letting  the  selfish  interests 
and  desires  of  individuals,  social  classes,  and  nations 
compete  with  and  counteract  one  another.  There 
is  universal  recognition  of  the  madness  and  evil  of 
this  method,  which  has  ended  in  terror  and  which 
threatens  Europe  with  still  worse  self-ruin.  Man¬ 
kind  has  been  painfully  taught  to  realize  that  even 
politics  needs  moral  principles,  that  its  guiding  spirit 
is  not  only  to  be  the  mutual  compromise  and  tension 
of  natural  interests  but  the  ideal  of  righteousness, 
and  still  more  that  of  love  and  peace,  mutual  help 
and  solidarity.  However  far  we  may  be  from  the 
application  of  such  principles  in  the  present  position 
of  the  world,  there  is  no  doubt  of  their  necessity. 
Politics  too  needs  to  be  converted  and  redeemed. 

The  civitas  Dei ,  the  would-be  theocracy  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  was  succeeded  by  sovereign  States.  As 
we  shall  see,  the  development  was  necessary.  But 
now  the  world  has  learned  with  dread  that  the  sov¬ 
ereignty  of  States  is  not  the  last  word  in  politics,  but 


90 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


that  they  must  give  up  something  of  their  sov¬ 
ereignty  for  the  sake  of  the  whole  and  feel  their 
membership  of  a  higher  commonwealth  beneath  which 
they  are  subordinated,  if  our  entire  civilization  is  not 
to  perish  in  mutual  destruction.  In  both  these  re¬ 
spects  the  Theocracy  of  the  Middle  Ages  was  higher 
in  its  idea  than  the  modern  system  of  States  in 
Europe. 

But  it  had  to  perish.  There  were  two  causes.  The 
Church  did  not  respect  the  right  of  nationality.  The 
nations  had  to  live  their  own  life.  They  could  not  be 
suppressed  forever,  mixed  up,  and  used  capriciously 
by  Rome.  During  the  fifteenth  century  the  nations 
were  aroused.  They  became  conscious  of  a  national 
life.  But  Rome  was  unable  to  attend  to  the  just 
claims  of  individual  nations.  Now  when  nationalism 
has  degraded  itself  and  has  almost  become  a  term  of 
abuse,  so  that  what  is  national  will  probably  be 
trodden  underfoot  with  the  same  brutality  that  dif¬ 
ferent  nationalisms  used  toward  each  other,  we  ought 
to  remember  that  a  people,  a  nation,  is  a  home,  a 
blessed  home.  For  the  human  spirit  and  for  the 
genuine  products  of  higher  culture,  for  their  intimate 
and  delicate  peculiarities,  national  life  has  meant  much 
that  is  good  and  that  cannot  be  weighed  or  measured 
or  stated.  But  into  this  home  have  entered  devils,  the 
policy  of  force,  mammon  and  all  the  rest.  They  have 
changed  the  friendly  home,  open  to  all  kind  guests, 
into  a  training-school  in  self-sufficiency  and  inacces¬ 
sible  conceit,  nay,  into  a  treacherous  postern  gate. 
But  this  must  not  conceal  from  us  the  rights  and 
necessity  of  the  national  idea. 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  91 


Within  the  Church  too  nationalities  have  become 
temptations  to  relapse  into  pagan  idolatry  of  the 
State.  But  from  the  great  Christian  family  national 
characteristics  are  not  excommunicated ;  they  con¬ 
tribute  to  the  wealth  of  corporate  life.  In  the  sphere 
of  religion  there  is  no  slight  danger  of  a  levelling 
that  lacks  respect  for  what  is  fine  and  spontaneous  in 
the  world  of  the  heart.  Religious  zeal  and  activity, 
when  transferred,  for  instance,  from  Anglo-Saxon  to 
French  or  Teutonic  soil,  easily  become  to  some  extent 
foreign,  something  that  remains  on  the  surface  and 
is  never  able  to  assimilate  with  the  secret  powers  of 
the  soul.  There  are  many  well-meaning  and  active 
men  and  women  whose  missionary  zeal  is  rather 
superficial  when  it  is  a  question  of  other  countries 
and  other  parts  of  Christendom  than  those  to  which 
they  belong.  I  remember  the  Scottish  seamen’s  mis¬ 
sionary  in  a  French  harbour  who  really  wished  to 
convert  Frenchmen  and  Flemings.  In  the  absence 
of  a  clientele,  however,  he  also  directed  his  efforts  to 
Scandinavian  sailors,  but  he  complained  to  me  of  a 
difficulty.  It  was  not  so  easy  to  collect  money  in 
England  and  Scotland  for  this  object,  ‘‘for  they  think 
that  the  Scandinavian  countries  already  have  the 
Gospel.”  Something  analogous  can  be  said  about  the 
manner  in  which  German  Christianity  has  sometimes 
regarded  other  Christian  nations  and  tried  to  pro¬ 
mote  Evangelic  belief.  We  are  at  a  period  when 
North  America  especially  means  and  must  mean  still 
more  than  before  for  Evangelic  Christianity  and 
when  many  spiritual  boundaries  will  have  to  be  lev¬ 
elled.  All  the  more  important  is  the  mutual  respect 


92 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


on  all  sides  for  such  peculiarities  as  are  conneetea 
with  national  characteristics.  We  have  no  use  for 
well-meant,  sweeping  generalizations. 

But  in  the  end  it  is  not  nations  but  souls  that  are 
to  be  saved.  The  other  and  more  serious  cause  of  the 
dissolution  of  the  mediaeval  divine  State  was  that  the 
soul  was  hampered.  The  guardianship  of  the  Church 
would  not  release  it  for  free  and  mature  intercourse 
with  God  as  was  the  intention  of  the  Gospel.  The 
religious  needs  of  the  individual  did  not  get  their  due. 
The  new  catholicity  we  now  aim  at,  as  a  spiritual 
basis  for  a  supernational  commonwealth  and  its  legal 
institutions,  must  not  commit,  in  a  cruder  or  more 
refined  form,  the  same  crimes  against  personalities, 
human  and  national.  Good  intentions  easily  become 
troublesome  when  in  the  name  of  unity  they  naively 
force  their  own  customs  on  others  without  respect 
for  the  special  religious  habits  of  the  separate 
spiritual  homes. 

The  Church  is  ashamed  of  the  excesses  of  national¬ 
ism  within  the  walls  of  the  Church  itself.  I  have  a 
dreadful  anthology  of  spiritual  war  eloquence  from 
pulpits,  in  different  languages  and  from  different 
groups  and  organizations  in  the  Church.  It  is  best 
to  drown  such  spiritual  sustenance  in  the  sea  of  ob¬ 
livion.  Trumpet  blasts,  which  were  then  proudly 
blazoned  forth  and  aroused  approval,  especially  if 
turned  against  the  witnesses  of  Christian  unity  and 
Christian  conscience,  have  died  away.  They  bring 
no  honour  to  those  who  caused  them.  But  one  ques¬ 
tion  cannot  be  repressed:  Have  the  national  com¬ 
munions  been  worse  than  the  corporate  communions, 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  93 


the  Established  Churches  worse  than  the  Free 
Churches  ? 

Such  hecatombs  have  been  sacrificed  to  the  gods  of 
nationalism  that  they  ought  soon  to  be  satiated  for 
ever,  but  unfortunately  there  seems  little  prospect  of 
this.  Fresh  regions  are  delivered  over  to  be  divided 
by  nationalism,  soon  giving  rise  to  bloodshed.  In 
some  essential  respects  the  peace  is  a  cruel  mockery 
against  the  principle  of  the  right  of  nations  and  lan¬ 
guages  to  self-determination.  Those  who  hold  tem¬ 
porary  sway  move  parts  of  the  countries  and  peoples 
like  pieces  on  a  chessboard,  according  to  the  old, 
familiar  methods  from  the  day  of  cabinet  politics. 
Behind  the  game  one  seems  to  see  the  devil’s  con¬ 
tented  grin.  But,  thank  God,  in  other  respects  the 
peace  shows  that  he  is  not  sole  master  of  the  situa¬ 
tion.  There  is  an  attempt  to  hide  the  Moloch  of 
nationalism  and  imperialism  beneath  all  sorts  of  pro¬ 
tective  disguises  and  to  demand  a  place  for  him  in 
the  temple  of  Christianity  and  of  all  the  virtues.  In 
the  opposed  camps  there  are  servants  of  the  Church 
who  in  sincere  and  glowing  patriotism  have  wor¬ 
shipped  this  deity  to  such  an  extent  that  they  have 
wished  to  defend  crimes  that  nations  or  individuals 
will  have  the  tragic  fate  of  bearing  with  them  through 
history.  The  characteristic  of  the  God  of  Chris¬ 
tianity  is,  as  the  Archbishop  of  York  expressed  it, 
that  He  cannot  be  made  an  ally  but  can  only  be  the 
Lord.  Only  unconditional  obedience  to  divine  au¬ 
thority  can  abolish  selfishness,  individual  or  collective 
— divided  according  to  nations  or  social  groups — and 
establish  peace  and  righteousness  on  earth. 


94 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


When  the  war  broke  out  a  meeting  was  assembled 
at  Constance,  with  Allen  Baker  in  the  chair,  which  did 
not  separate  without  founding  The  World  Alliance 
for  Promoting  International  Friendship  Through  the 
Churches.  Its  activity  was  linked  up  with  the  ef¬ 
forts  made  before  the  war  to  bring  Church  people 
in  Germany  and  England  closer  together.  The  lead¬ 
ing  journal  of  those  efforts  was  Siegmund-Schultze’s 
organ  Die  Eiche  which  with  objectivity  and  manly 
calm  defied  the  tempest  of  martial  passions.  The 
Goodwill  has  been  issued  by  the  British  branch.  The 
Dutch  International  Christendom  and  American, 
Swiss  and  Danish  periodicals  have  arisen.  These 
and  occasional  publications  of  the  World  Alliance  in 
Swedish  and  other  languages  have  vied  with  a  series 
of  ecclesiastical  and  religious  papers  which  are  inde¬ 
pendent  of  the  World  Alliance.  I  may  mention 
among  those  which  are  worthy  of  great  honour  a 
fearless,  acute  and  clear-voiced  English  herald  for 
the  high  ideals  of  the  Gospel — The  Challenge — and 
Gustaf  Adolf  Deissmann’s  justly  admired  Evange- 
lische  Wochenbriefe, — in  exhorting  to  reflection,  and 
by  zeal  and  dispassioned  critical  work  of  informa¬ 
tion,  attempting  to  counteract  the  effects  of  war  hyp¬ 
notism.  One  of  the  leaders  of  American  Lutheranism 
wrote  in  the  spring  of  1918  in  a  letter  that  “the 
Church  of  Christ  ought  to  have  the  moral  courage 
to  say  a  word  in  order  to  check  the  unchristian  flood 
of  hate  and  calumny  which  has  affected  the  countries 
at  war  still  worse  than  the  war  itself.’ ’ 

On  the  whole  it  must  be  said  that  the  supernational, 
universal  character  of  the  Church  has  been  subordi- 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  95 


nated  far  too  much  to  the  national  task;  or  rather, 
the  national  interest  has  been  conceived  in  a  way  that 
dishonours  both  religion  and  the  nation.  Many  for¬ 
get  religion  for  the  nation.  Do  we  not  all  acknowl¬ 
edge  the  one  catholic  Church  ?  During  the  war  Chris¬ 
tians  and  servants  of  the  Church  in  the  separate 
countries  took  part  in  national  self-adoration  in  a 
way  that  we  should  like  to  delete  from  the  pages  of 
history.  And  this  happened  quite  as  much,  at  least 
as  much,  in  the  Church  of  Rome  as  in  national  com¬ 
munions  and  free  communities.  However,  in  them 
all  there  were  also  those  who  did  not  bend  the  knee 
to  Baal,  but  were  a  moral  salt  among  their  nations, 
carrying  out  the  idea  of  brotherhood  even  at  the  risk 
of  becoming  isolated  and  reaping  shame.  During  the 
world  war  we  learned  better  than  ever  before  to  ap¬ 
preciate  two  communities,  inspired  above  all  others 
by  the  ideas  of  primitive  Christianity.  They  exist  in 
each  of  the  contesting  parties  and  are  called  by 
simple  Christian  names,  “Friends”  and  “Brothers.” 
I  mean  the  Quakers  and  the  Moravians.  In  justice  it 
ought  to  be  stated  that  neither  of  these  communities 
possesses  the  same  solidarity  with  the  nation  as 
accompanies  the  national  Church’s  vocation  to  edu¬ 
cate  its  people. 

I  have  read  more  of  the  religious  war  literature 
than  is  good  for  the  soul.  Still  there  are  also  extraor¬ 
dinary  products.  We  remember  the  German  professor 
who  related  that  during  the  whole  war  he  read  with 
true  edification  “Vers  I’Evangile  sous  la  nuee  de 
guerre”  and  other  meditations  of  Wilfred  Monod. 
Read  Abbe  Felix  Klein  or  Siegmund-Schultze  or 


96 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Ihmels  or  Giampiccoli  or  Donald  Hankey  or  David 
Cairns  or  Bishop  Talbot,  not  to  speak  of  American 
examples.  But  I  defy  any  one  to  prove  that  the  na¬ 
tional  communions  were  more  distinguished  for  self- 
righteousness  and  chauvinism  than  the  free  Churches. 
At  times  it  almost  looked  as  if  the  opposite  were  true. 
In  this  neither  group  in  the  countries  at  war  has  any 
reason  to  be  more  proud  than  the  other. 

National  Church  Ideals  and  Free  Church  Ideals 

The  ideal  of  a  national  Church  is  very  often  con¬ 
founded  with  establishment,  but  it  must  be  carefully 
distinguished  from  it.  The  Church  has  been  disestab¬ 
lished  and  partly  disendowed  in  a  more  or  less  radical 
way,  e.g.,  in  Germany,  Latvia  and  Esthonia,  but  never¬ 
theless  it  preserves  in  those  countries  the  character  of 
a  national  Church.  Indeed  many  testimonies  are  given 
even  from  socialistic  governments  to  the  national  char¬ 
acter  and  to  the  national  importance  of  the  Church. 
It  was  said  at  the  Second  Constitutive  Common  As¬ 
sembly  of  the  Evangelic  bodies  in  Germany  at 
Stuttgart,  1921,  where  the  Confederation  of  all  the 
LandesMrchen  with  additional  representation  of  the 
free  religious  societies  and  of  theological  research  was 
founded,1  that  the  ideal  of  a  national  Church  is  car¬ 
ried  out  in  spite  of  the  enormous  and  to  human  eyes 
unsurmountable  hardships  under  the  actual  circum¬ 
stances  with  a  wider  scope  and  a  more  intense  love 
than  before  the  revolution,  when  in  some  places  the 

i  That  Confederation  of  Evangelic  Christendom  in  Germany 
has  been  definitely  established  in  Wittenberg,  in  the  Stadt- 
kirche,  on  Ascension  Day,  1922. 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  97 


State  Church  was  imprisoned  in  certain  classes  of 
society,  a  bureaucratic  institution  rather  than  a  na¬ 
tional  religious  communion. 

Establishment  can  have  very  different  forms. 

(a)  It  can  be  identified  with  the  realm  as  in  former 
Russia,  where  the  Czar  was  also  the  head  of  the 
Church,  a  Russian  translation  of  old  Byzantine  iden¬ 
tification  of  throne  and  altar,  already  prefigured  in 
the  Zoroastrian  communion  of  the  Sassanidae  in  An¬ 
cient  Persia. 

(b)  But  also  in  the  West,  where  Byzantinism  has 
been  broken,  we  can  distinguish  two  characteristic 
types  of  establishment.  In  the  one,  parsons,  super¬ 
intendents  and  bishops  are  wholly  or  chiefly  ap¬ 
pointed  from  above  by  a  king,  a  government  or  by  a 
prime  minister,  and  the  affairs  of  the  Church  in  gen¬ 
eral  form  part  of  the  business  of  the  government. 
This  type  existed  before  the  war  in  most  of  the  Ger¬ 
man  Landeskirchen  and  still  to-day  in  Denmark, 
Norway  and  England,  though  in  England  the  recog¬ 
nition  of  the  king  by  Archbishop  Laud’s  preface  to 
the  Thirty-nine  Articles  as  “Supreme  governor  of 
the  Church  of  England,”  is  not  supposed  to  include 
the  royal  episcopacy  and  though  in  these  countries 
the  Church  is  acquiring  more  and  more  the  means  of 
expressing  its  own  will. 

(c)  In  Scotland,  Sweden  and  Finland  the  estab¬ 
lishment  does  not  exclude  self-government.  The  par¬ 
ishes  choose  their  own  divines  according  to  a  most 
democratic  way  of  election.  The  parish  council  and 
the  parish  assembly  are  responsible  also  for  the  parish 
sanctuary.  Bishops  are  elected  by  the  clergy,  the 


98 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


chapters  and,  in  two  cases,  also  by  the  universities. 
Episcopacy  is  constitutional.  I  can  in  every  question 
be  outvoted  by  my  chapter,  and  I  hope  that  no 
‘ 4  reform  ”  will  reform  away  that  authority  of  the 
chapter.  The  Kyrkomote  in  Finland  and  Sweden  and 
the  General  Assembly  in  Scotland  are  the  highest 
representation  of  the  self-governing  Church.  In 
Sweden  and  Finland  the  Kyrkomote  has  the  right  of 
veto  against  the  government  and  parliament  in  re¬ 
ligious  and  ecclesiastical  matters. 

Reasons  can  be  given  for  one  or  another  of  these 
types  of  establishment,  which  in  normal  cases  means 
a  public  recognition  of  religion  that  is  to  the  benefit 
of  the  State.  But  establishment  is  not  necessary  for 
a  public  recognition  of  the  place  of  Christianity  in 
the  civil  commonwealth.  There  is  no  large  country 
where  public  life  (except  the  schools)  is  more  per¬ 
meated  and  connected  with  religion  and  the  Church 
than  in  the  United  States,  although  there  is  no  estab¬ 
lishment. 

But  of  course  establishment  means  one  reason  more 
for  the  position  of  religion  in  society.  Obligatory 
instruction  in  religion  in  the  schools  is  as  a  rule  com¬ 
manded  by  establishment.  No  one  will  fail  to  recog¬ 
nize  that  some  knowledge  about  the  Prophets,  Jesus 
Christ,  the  Apostles,  the  Bible,  and  the  great  men 
and  women  of  Christian  belief  and  charity  has  the 
same  right  to  form  part  of  the  most  elementary  edu¬ 
cation  in  a  civilized  country  as  knowledge  of  kings 
and  presidents  and  battles  and  rivers  in  Asia  and 
strange  animals  in  South  Africa.  During  the  war 
a  brilliant  French  politician  quoted  “a  great  Eng- 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  99 


lish  author”  in  a  most  eloquent  speech.  The  quota¬ 
tion  runs  thus :  ‘ 4  Whosoever  would  save  his  life  shall 
lose  it,  and  whosoever  would  lose  his  life  shall 
find  it!” 

The  rule  observed  in  most  parts  of  Germany  after 
the  revolution  proves  that  instruction  in  religion  in 
the  State  schools  can  be  maintained  without  establish¬ 
ment.  Neither  establishment  nor  a  national  Church 
is.  of  course,  necessary  in  order  to  teach  society  that 
no  member  of  it  must  be  allowed  to  be  ignorant  of 
the  greatest  words  that  have  been  spoken  on  this 
earth,  or  of  the  beautiful  lives  of  the  heroes  of  the 
soul.  In  this  connection  it  is  sufficient  to  point  out 
that  the  question  of  establishment  (of  course  com¬ 
bined  with  necessary  freedom  for  the  Church),  and 
still  more  of  the  national  Church,  is  not  to  be  solved 
too  lightly,  without  taking  into  account  some  impor¬ 
tant  facts. 

The  modern  State  feels  responsible  for  the  material 
and  moral  welfare  of  the  citizens.  Such  a  provision 
may  go  too  far.  But  it  also  easily  falls  short  of  its 
task  and,  in  particular,  it  sometimes  makes  a  curious 
selection.  When  the  body  is  concerned  every  quack 
is  not  allowed  to  dabble.  Shall  the  citizen  be  freely 
exposed  to  any  enterprising  fisher  of  souls?  Com¬ 
pulsory  vaccination  has  checked  disease  incredibly. 
Should  not  society  provide  the  finest  part  of  child 
and  man,  the  soul,  with  some  strength  and  prescrip¬ 
tion  against  spiritual  epidemics?  Against  supersti¬ 
tion  and  fanaticism  enlightenment  and  everything 
else  are  in  the  end  vain.  Only  religion  helps. 

Modern  society  cannot  escape  its  responsibility  in 


100 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


religion.  It  must  give  every  child  and  citizen  the 
nucleus  of  religious  knowledge.  Difficulties  arise.  It 
seems  easier  to  shut  the  eyes  and  pretend  that  re¬ 
ligion  does  not  concern  society  so  far  as  it  does  not 
interfere  with  the  law.  But  difficulties  exist  in  order 
to  be  overcome,  not  to  be  concealed.  Of  course,  con¬ 
fessional  and  individual  subjectivism  cannot  rule  that 
official  instruction.  It  must  be  exact.  Christianity  is 
a  tremendous  fact  in  history  and  in  men’s  hearts. 
Every  member  of  our  civilization  ought  to  know  some 
of  its  most  elementary  classical  expressions,  such  as 
the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  the  parables.  A  dan¬ 
gerous  teaching,  some  one  remarks.  True,  a  rather 
revolutionary  teaching.  It  operates  the  only  revolu¬ 
tion  worthy  of  its  name:  the  change  of  mind  and 
life.  We  remember  what  the  mighty  Roi  sol  eil  said 
of  his  chaplains:  “I  am  always  satisfied  with  B.,  but 
L.  always  makes  me  dissatisfied  with  myself.”  If, 
with  Emerson,  the  best  service  to  a  man  is  to  move 
the  ferment  of  discontent  in  him,  there  is  every  rea¬ 
son  for  modern  society  to  furnish  every  citizen  of 
different  creeds  with  knowledge  of  the  most  concen¬ 
trated  expression  of  homesickness  for  the  ideal  and 
of  trust. 

It  may  be  easier  for  a  national  religious  communion 
to  awaken  or  keep  alive  such  a  responsibility  in  civil 
society.  But  if  the  State  knows  its  own  interest  and 
sees  the  necessity  of  a  common  spiritual  authority,  it 
certainly  will  not  fail  to  teach  mankind  the  most 
essential  parts  of  the  Book  of  mankind,  regardless 
of  possible  ecclesiastical  fear  of  immediate  access  to 
the  Bible. 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  101 


Has  the  National  Church  a  Religious  Significance ? 

The  contrast  is  not  between  the  Established  Church 
and  the  Free  Church.  The  relation  to  the  State  is  a 
subordinate  matter.  But  the  opposed  ideals  are  (1) 
a  communion  which  one  joins  as  a  corporation  (such 
a  union  may  therefore  be  called  a  corporate  Church), 
and  (2)  a  communion  in  which  one  is  born,  baptized 
as  an  infant,  brought  up — a  communion  that  feels  its 
responsibility  for  the  whole  people  and  takes  into 
account  the  mysterious  action  of  the  Spirit  in  human 
souls.  Is  the  national  Church  at  the  utmost  an  emer¬ 
gency  measure  which  can  be  tolerated  as  such,  or  does 
it  include  a  positive  advantage? 

If  we  look  upon  Christianity  as  a  redemption  of 
the  community  and  of  humanity  as  well  as  the  indi¬ 
vidual,  we  must  value  every  possibility  for  Chris¬ 
tianity  to  influence  society.  Eminent  Free  Church¬ 
men  in  Scotland  give  as  one  of  the  reasons  for  their 
desire  for  reunion,  the  feeling  of  responsibility  that 
the  national  Church  has  for  society  and  the  nation 
as  a  whole.  While  the  Free  Church  mag  be  able  to 
come  to  anchor  among  certain  groups  of  society  and 
there  establish  for  itself  a  comparatively  peaceful  and 
honourable  existence,  the  national  Church  has  never 
peace  of  conscience  so  long  as  large  groups  in  the 
nation,  especially  labour  and  the  highest  intellectual 
culture,  are  indifferent  to  the  Gospel.  Is  there  not 
in  this  anxiety  and  in  this  continually  stimulating 
task  something  of  Christ’s  own  Spirit?  He  too 
looked  upon  His  task  as  being  chiefly  concerned  with 
the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel.  In  the  same 


102 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


way  the  national  Church  has  a  certain  definite  sphere 
of  work.  She  cannot  settle  down  in  peace  and  self¬ 
content  within  certain  more  or  less  comfortable  pro¬ 
tective  walls  of  private  communions,  but  she  is  always 
impelled  to  bring  the  good  message,  by  word  and  deed, 
to  each  human  soul  in  the  nation. 

The  ideal  of  the  national  Church  thus  contains  the 
social  claim  as  well  as  the  educational  claim.  Social 
and  economic  problems  cannot  be  ignored  or  thrust 
aside  by  the  national  Church.  They  force  themselves 
upon  her  to  the  same  extent  as  she  takes  her  mission 
seriously.  With  regard  to  education,  it  is  not  an  acci¬ 
dental  circumstance  that  the  Evangelical  Lutheran 
National  Churches  have  maintained  more  generally 
and  strictly  than  any  others  the  demand  for  academic 
education  for  their  servants. 

Whether  the  Church  has  the  form  of  a  private 
society  trying  to  get  as  many  inscribed  members  as 
possible,  or  it  considers  itself  as  a  national  com¬ 
munion,  the  fundamental  principle  is,  of  course,  the 
same — God’s  self-revelation  to  mankind.  But  on  this 
foundation  the  building  can  be  erected  in  two  dif¬ 
ferent  styles,  according  to  the  preponderance  of  one 
or  the  other  of  the  two  great  ideas  inherent  in  all 
real  Christianity,  never  quite  reconcilable,  but  "both 
necessary.  The  one  or  the  other  can  be  chiefly  ex¬ 
pressed  in  the  outward  organization  of  the  com¬ 
munion.  In  considering  the  advantages  of  the  na¬ 
tional  Church  and  of  the  corporate  Church  history 
must  be  consulted.  Diverse  suppositions  may  be 
entertained  for  different  countries  and  communions. 
Individual  conditions  must  be  interpreted  without 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  103 


unwise  generalization.  The  two  great  ideas  are  the 
subjective  one — the  decision  and  choice  of  the  indi¬ 
vidual  soul  for  itself;  and  the  objective  one — the 
superhuman  and  inconceivable  working  of  God’s 
grace. 

One  is  the  personal  resolve  of  the  individual.  A 
choice  is  dictated  between  God  and  the  world.  Each 
person  must  form  his  decision.  He  cannot  be  called 
a  fully  responsible  Christian  before  he  has  experi¬ 
enced  a  conscious  choice  to  belong  to  Christ.  This 
personal  decision  is  the  root  of  the  conception  of  the 
Church  as  a  society  with  inscribed  members.  We  see 
how  the  first  assembly  met  at  Jerusalem.  We  reflect 
upon  all  small  circles  since  gathered  for  prayer  and 
instruction,  frequently  under  external  pressure  or 
persecution.  A  glimpse  of  something  similar  is  at 
times  caught  from  Luther’s  discourse  on  the  congre¬ 
gation  of  the  faithful.  The  same  eclectic,  individual¬ 
istic  wish  to  assemble  none  but  the  faithful  in 
4 ‘Scriptural”  congregations  animates  persons  inclined 
to  set  themselves  more  or  less  both  formerly  and  now 
in  opposition  to  the  Church.  This  desire  arises  from 
dissatisfaction  at  the  multitude’s  being  indiscrimi¬ 
nately  embraced  by  the  Church.  Congregations  of 
that  kind  have  their  function,  live  their  life,  and,  as 
a  rule,  take  refuge  sooner  or  later  in  the  fold,  which, 
from  a  deeper  point  of  view,  they  never  forsake. 
However  serious  and  inevitable  personal  choice  may 
be,  it  is  precarious  to  lay  the  foundation  of  a  re¬ 
ligious  community  upon  human  piety. 

The  other  fundamental  principle  is  the  work  of 
God,  His  grace  past  finding  out.  He  maketh  His  sun 


104 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


to  rise  on  the  evil  and  on  the  good,  and  sendeth  His 
rain  on  the  just  and  on  the  unjust.  For  a  righteous 
or  a  good  man  some  would  even  die — but  ‘  ‘  Christ  died 
for  us  while  we  were  yet  sinners”  (Rom.  5:8).  There 
is  something  inconceivable,  even  offensive,  in  the 
parable  of  the  labourers  in  the  vineyard,  and  in  such 
a  daring  preacher  of  consolation  as  Luther,  who  fear¬ 
lessly  opened  wide  the  door  to  the  grace  of  God.  But 
the  beginning  and  the  end  in  our  Church  is  forgive¬ 
ness  of  sins.  She  desires  naught  else  than  to  win 
her  way  with  this  message  to  souls,  for  she  is  sure 
that  nothing  else  can  give  them  joy  and  moral  strength 
than  to  be  embraced  by  God’s  unmerited  mercy.  If 
any  form  of  the  Church  symbolizes  this  side  of  Chris¬ 
tianity,  it  is  the  national  communion.  She  defines  no 
limits  for  her  faith  in  Almighty  God,  and  for  her 
duty  of  caring  for  souls,  she  is  only  bounded  by  the 
realm.  It  is  obvious  that  she  does  not  mark  off  one 
nation  and  one  national  community  from  greater 
Christendom,  but  on  the  contrary  conceives  them  as 
her  home  and  the  sphere  of  duty  appointed  to  her 
within  the  universal,  i.e.,  catholic  Church  of  God. 
This  conception  follows  the  rule  of  limitation  adopted 
by  the  Saviour.  We  belong  to  a  province  of  Christ’s 
Church.  But  we  will  not  count  this  province  one 
whit  less  than  the  whole  of  our  people — all  who  do 
not  expressly  renounce  Church  life  in  common,  and 
never  entirely  escape  from  her  sight.  This  broad 
view  of  the  Church  as  concerning  the  nation  as  a 
whole  brings  its  advantage  and  detriment  alike.  The 
main  point  is  that  in  the  very  notion  of  the  Church 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  105 

in  the  State  we  catch  a  human  echo  of  the  funda¬ 
mental  article  of  our  faith — God’s  all-embracing 
grace. 

The  Augsburg  definition  of  the  Church  is  of  course 
derived  neither  from  voluntary  combination  in  the 
sense  of  a  private  society  or  a  free  religious  body, 
nor  from  the  idea  of  a  national  communion;  but  it 
describes  the  Church  as  built  upon  the  Word  about 
Christ.  Est  autern  ecclesia  congregatio  sanctorum  in 
qua  evangelium  rede  docetur,  et  rede  administrantur 
sacr amenta.  The  Church’s  foundations  are  laid  by 
the  Word  as  revealed  in  Scripture,  sacrament  and 
proclamation.  In  essence  the  Word  is  Logos,  Christ. 
He  is  God’s  Word  to  mankind,  and  the  substance  of 
the  announcement.  Rudolf  Sohm  maintained  that 
“the  Word”  in  Luther’s  sense  is  not  “the  written 
Word  completed  in  the  early  ages,  but  the  living 
Word  of  God,  nourished  by  the  message  of  salva¬ 
tion.”  It  should  be  added  that  this  same  Word,  on 
which  the  Church  is  founded,  consists  of  an  objec¬ 
tive,  divine  power.  Such  an  acceptation  includes  in 
the  Word  all  that  God  has  done  and  said  in  the 
present  and  the  past,  for  whosoever  can  see  and  hear. 
Such  a  foundation  makes  more  than  one  type  of  Chris¬ 
tian  communion  possible. 

EFFECTS  OF  THE  WAR  ON  CHURCH  UNITY 

(a)  The  division  brought  about  by  the  war  is  deep 
and  terrible.  We  have  spoken  about  the  disgrace 
brought  upon  the  Christian  name  by  the  inability  of 


106 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


the  Church  during  the  war  to  preserve  its  spiritual 
fellowship  better  and  to  testify  better  that  the  Cross 
of  Christ  is  a  unifying  power  that  is  above  all  dif¬ 
ferences.  Much  has  been  attempted  and  reformed,  in 
uncertainty  or  in  certainty,  to  the  honour  of  the 
Christian  name,  in  order  to  maintain  and  strengthen 
the  bonds  that  unite  all  true  disciples  of  Christ,  no 
matter  on  which  side  of  the  sundering  abyss  of  war 
they  stood.  We  shall  later  in  this  exposition  deal 
with  this  subject.  The  dishonour  of  the  Church  is 
mingled  with  the  heroism  of  love  and  faith  in  indi¬ 
vidual  Christians  and  groups  of  Christians.  At  the 
same  time  the  war  has  accelerated  the  striving  for 
unity  in  each  separate  nation.  And,  too,  the  common 
pressure  from  without  has  strengthened  the  solidarity 
in  the  sphere  of  religion  and  compelled  those  who 
otherwise  belong  to  different  camps  to  acknowledge 
one  another  and  co-operate  in  the  labour  of  mercy 
and  in  the  care  of  souls. 

One  day  during  the  first  autumn  of  the  war  a  vast 
crowd  of  the  Evangelic  Lutherans  of  Saxony  was 
congregated  in  Dresden  to  pay  homage  to  the  Catholic 
King  of  the  House  of  Wettin,  who,  modest  and 
popular,  friendly  and  brusque,  had  to  leave  his  fore¬ 
fathers’  castle  a  few  years  later  with  a  drastic  word. 
They  sought  for  a  common  mode  of  expression.  Sud¬ 
denly  Ein  feste  Burg  sounded  forth.  It  was  not  the 
only  time  that  German  Catholics  joined  in  Luther’s 
defiant  hymn  of  faith.  In  England  on  the  initiative 
of  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and  York  consul¬ 
tations  were  held  in  a  joint  committee  of  Churchmen 
and  Nonconformists.  The  reports  opened  prospects 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  107 


for  mutual  understanding  and  reunion  of  which  the 
boldest  optimist  would  not  have  dared  to  dream  be¬ 
fore  the  war. 

Both  these  movements  were  to  a  certain  extent 
transient.  Unfortunately  we  already  detect  retro¬ 
gression  in  the  mutual  approach  of  the  confessions 
within  the  frontiers  of  the  nations.  When  the  ex¬ 
ternal  pressure  ceases  one  can  take  breath  and  reflect. 
Old  hesitations  reappear.  One  perhaps  is  a  trifle  sur¬ 
prised  at  having  recently  been  so  ready  to  accede. 
The  bold  advance  is  not  followed  up.  But  we  must 
not  demand  that  the  rapid  pace  shall  be  continued. 
The  present  hesitation  must  not  be  interpreted  as  a 
deadlock  but  as  a  reculer  'pour  mieux  sauter. 

(b)  The  effects  of  the  war  were  too  violent  to  last 
long.  Even  where  hatred  and  intensified  fear  are 
preserved  convulsively  by  artificial  means  souls  can¬ 
not  be  wrathful  forever.  As  speech  becomes  free  and 
information  as  to  the  real  state  of  affairs  makes  its 
way,  warlike  feelings  retreat,  even  though  it  is  a  long 
time  before  the  self-destructive  antagonisms  are 
smoothed  away. 

In  spite  of  peace  and  conferences  violence  still  has 
its  hour  and  darkness  still  prevails.  This  will  not 
persist  forever.  It  is  not  certain  that  we  shall  see 
the  day  that  can  bring  forth  humanity’s  benefit  from 
the  world  catastrophe.  But  just  as  certainly  as  long- 
suffering  love  has  once  more  shown  its  blessed  power, 
so  certain  is  our  faith  that  the  new  and  purer  right¬ 
eousness,  which  has  been  painfully  branded  into  the 
consciousness  of  individuals  and  nations,  will  at 
length  become  a  reality  in  the  inner  structure  of  our 


108 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


communities  and  in  the  corporate  life  of  the  States. 

But  the  new  kingdom  cannot  be  conjured  by  fine 
ideas  and  words.  It  needs  a  new  humanity.  “The 
old  Adam  in  us  must  be  repressed  and  killed  by  daily 
repentance  and  sanctification,  and  daily  a  new  man 
must  arise  and  come  forth,”  for  the  real  enemy  and 
disturber  of  peace  is  the  instinct  of  the  wild  beast 
that  exists  in  every  one  and  seeks  expression  in  more 
refined  or  more  brutal  forms.  Our  chief  effort  for 
peace,  while  the  restoration  of  real  peace  seems  be¬ 
yond  human  powers,  is,  therefore,  in  the  words  of  a 
letter  from  Romain  Rolland  written  during  the  blood¬ 
shed,  to  save  peace  in  the  hearts  of  ourselves  and  of 
mankind,  as  many  as  remain  faithful  in  love.  He 
added:  “To  our  last  breath  we  shall  maintain  our 
faith  in  the  spirit  of  life  and  love,  which  is  God 
living  in  mankind,  to-day  scourged,  crucified  and 
buried,  and  our  hope  in  His  resurrection.” 

At  the  public  meeting  held  in  Kingsway  Hall  in 
London  on  March  14,  1918,  in  support  of  the  Ecu¬ 
menical  Conference,  Dr.  Henry  T.  Hodgkin  told  of 
the  separation  after  the  meeting  at  Constance  in 
August,  1914,  and  of  the  assembly  at  Berne  a  year 
later.  “I  stood  in  the  railway  station  at  Cologne 
twenty-four  hours  before  the  ultimatum  between  our 
country  and  Germany  expired,  and  said  good-bye  to 
Dr.  Siegmund-Schultze,  who  since  that  time  has  car¬ 
ried  out  such  noble  work  for  English  prisoners  of 
war  in  Germany.  As  the  cheers  sounded  in  our  ears 
from  one  troop-train  after  another,  he  said  to  me: 
‘Whatever  may  happen,  nothing  shall  come  between 
us.’  It  was  the  expression  of  a  Christian  faith  that 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  109 


was  to  unite  us,  whatever  might  happen  between  the 
countries.  Twelve  months  afterwards  it  was  granted 
to  me  to  meet  him  again  face  to  face,  and  the  first 
thing  he  did  was  to  take  out  the  Moravians’  little 
book  with  a  Biblical  quotation  for  each  day  of  the 
year.  ‘  I  want  to  show  you  the  Bible  verse  for  to-day.  ’ 
He  opened  the  book  and  found  the  text:  ‘Behold,  I 
have  set  before  thee  an  open  door,  and  no  man  can 
shut  it’  (Rev.  3:8).” 

Are  we  to  mention  as  a  remarkable  thing  that 
Shakespeare  was  of  course  played  during  the  whole 
war  in  Germany  and  Bach  in  England?  Alas,  there 
were  in  that  epoch  other  phenomena  against  which 
such  self-evident  things  stand  out  as  just  and  brave. 
In  the  midst  of  the  war,  1917,  J.  Vernon  Bartlet  and 
A.  J.  Carlyle  issued  “Christianity  in  History,  a 
Study  of  Religious  Development,”  with  mottos  from 
Eucken  and  Troeltsch. 

The  political  and  national  contrasts  will  not  be  able 
to  keep  religion  asunder  in  the  long  run.  In  Latvia, 
where  the  contrast  has  been  apparent  between  the 
Latvian  population  and  the  small  minority  of  Baltic 
Germans,  even  under  the  hard  Russian  rule,  the  sec¬ 
ond  Latvian  General  Assembly  in  1922  completed 
the  new  democratic  organization  of  the  disestablished 
national  Church  by  introducing  Episcopacy.  After 
the  election  of  the  venerable  Dean  Irbe  to  become 
bishop  of  Latvia  in  Riga,  the  new  bishop  arose  amid 
breathless  silence  after  the  hymn  of  praise,  presented 
himself  as  the  servant  of  the  Latvian  communion,  and 
requested  three  things :  That  in  the  Church  of  Latvia 
there  be  no  more  mention  of  believing  and  unbeliev- 


110 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


ing  pastors,  that  the  difference  made  between  Latvian 
and  German  pastors  also  disappear,  all  being  inspired 
by  the  same  desire  to  serve  the  congregation  with  the 
gifts  given  by  the  Spirit,  and  that  the  Assembly  prove 
such  an  Evangelic  mood  by  giving  also  to  the  Ger¬ 
man  Pastor  Primarius  the  position  of  a  bishop  of  the 
German-speaking  Evangelic  communities  in  Latvia, 
which  was  accorded  unanimously. 

Meaning  of  Divisions 

It  was  necessary  to  consider  that  complex  process 
of  differentiation  in  order  not  to  be  bewildered  by  the 
great  number  of  groups  and  names. 

Often  division  was  necessary,  sometimes  helpful. 
Great  things  were  achieved  through  division.  We 
must  not  always  cry  over  it.  “There  is  much  cant 
to-day  about  the  divisions  of  Christendom,  but  it  is 
still  true,  as  Milton  said,  that  ‘under  the  fantastic 
terrors  of  sect  and  religion,  we  wrong  the  earnest  and 
zealous  thirst  after  knowledge  and  understanding 
which  God  hath  stirred  up.’  We  must  unlearn  some 
of  our  talk  about  ‘unhappy  divisions.’  Divisions  are 
only  unhappy  when  tempers  are  sharp  and  awkward ; 
otherwise,  they  may  be  very  profitable,  and  very 
happy.  The  alternative  may  be  spiritual  death,  as 
history  has  witnessed  before  now.  Public  opinion 
does  not  necessarily  mean  freedom;  it  may  be  the 
the  death  of  liberty,  and  only  the  spirit  of  Jesus  can 
revive  it.  ” 1 

If  we  get  a  clear  historical  view  of  the  many  sec¬ 
tions  of  Christendom,  and  if  we  penetrate  into  their 

1  T.  R.  Glover. 


THE  DIVISIONS  OF  CHRISTENDOM  111 


essence,  the  seeming  confusion  is  changed  into  a 
variety  that  does  not  lack  unity.  Division  reveals 
itself  as  distribution.  “The  more  we  study  it  (the 
distribution  of  the  Church),  observing  how  the  .  .  . 
wants  and  capacities  of  men  in  all  ages  and  climes 
are  provided  for,  and  how  the  parts  are  made  to  act 
as  stimulants  to  each  other,  the  less  disposed  shall  we 
be  to  think  that  the  work  of  distribution  is  done 
badly.”  1 

i  Horace  Busknell. 


IV 

WAYS  TO  UNITY 


IV 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 

THREE  methods  present  themselves:  (1)  the 
method  of  absorption,  (2)  the  method  of  faith, 
and  (3)  the  method  of  love.  Let  us  first  con¬ 
sider  the  method  of  absorption  in  its  difference  from 
the  method  of  faith.  These  two  methods  may  also  be 
called  the  institutional  and  the  personal,  or  the  Roman 
and  the  Evangelic,  or  the  method  of  Rome  and  the 
method  of  Wittenberg. 

A  few  years  ago,  when  I  was  about  to  show  on  a 
map  of  the  world  what  an  American  survey  calls  the 
Lutheran  country,  that  is  to  say,  the  Scandinavian, 
Finnish,  and  Baltic  North,  and  Evangelic  Germany 
with  neighbouring  Lutheranism  in  Poland,  Czecho¬ 
slovakia,  Austria,  Hungary,  Roumania,  Jugo-Slavia, 
France,  and  Holland  (the  second  and  smaller  centre 
of  Lutheranism  being  situated  in  the  United  States 
and  numbering  twelve  to  thirteen  millions  of  souls), 
I  discovered  what  I  have  never  before  observed,  that 
if  you  divide  the  rectangular  projection  of  our  small 
planet  in  two  sections,  Rome,  Geneva,  and  Witten¬ 
berg  are  situated  on  the  central  line. 

On  the  right  wing  lies  the  really  old  and  venerable 
world — China,  with  Japan  and  other  partners  in 
Chinese  civilization — of  which  our  Erik  Gustaf  Geijer 
wrote  more  than  a  hundred  years  ago :  ‘  ‘  The  Oriental 

115 


116 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


surface  of  rigid  age  may  really  conceal  a  preserved 
youth,  and  if  one  is  permitted  to  guess,  we  should 
almost  suppose  that  for  these  old  nations  who  already 
meet  our  gaze  in  the  earliest  days  of  antiquity  Provi¬ 
dence  has  great  plans  and  wishes  to  be  able  to  count 
upon  their  undestroyed  strength  in  the  last  acts  of  the 
great  pageant  of  history,  just  as  they  were  the  chief 
actors  in  the  first.’ ’ 

The  left  wing  is  occupied  by  the  new  world,  full  of 
power  and  possibilities.  Pastor  Keller  rightly  entitles 
his  book  on  American  Christendom,  “Dynamis.”  In 
1902  in  a  famous  essay  on  “Americanization”  Harald 
Hjarne  called  the  United  States  a  rejuvenated  Eu¬ 
rope,  where  almost  every  European  people  could  find 
its  reflection  in  the  nation  that  was  composed  of  all 
sorts  of  noble  and  adventurous  elements ;  he  mocked  at 
the  Grecian  Europe’s  mixture  of  loftiness  and  offers 
of  friendship  toward  Roman  America,  where  the  pious 
Eneas-Pilgrim  Fathers  had  saved  the  inheritance  of 
ravaged  Ilion,  and  he  foresaw  the  day  when  “an 
American  Flamininus  would  dictate  peace  on  Eu¬ 
rope’s  own  soil  and  proclaim  the  gift  of  freedom  and 
independence  to  rejoicing  small  nations.  ’  ’  But  neither 
gold  nor  work  is  sufficient  for  this.  “He  who  is  pre¬ 
pared  to  sacrifice  his  life  is  stronger  than  the  heroes 
of  the  exchange  and  even  those  of  labour.”  This  seer 
predicted  the  suicidal  war  of  the  European  civilized 
world  and  the  growing  future  of  America. 

Near  to  the  central  line  we  stop  a  moment  at  two 
solemn  names  on  each  side,  Constantinople  and  Can¬ 
terbury.  During  many  centuries  the  problem  of 
Church  unity  meant  Rome  or  Constantinople  and  still 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


117 


has  the  same  aspect  to-day  to  the  larger  part  of 
Christendom.1  We  must  regret  that  noble  and  sin¬ 
cere  efforts,  such  as  that  made  by  Prince  Max  of 
Saxony  some  time  before  the  war,  have  always  up  to 
this  date  been  condemned  and  in  vain. 

When  we  arrive  at  the  West  I  shall  not  formulate 
the  problem  of  Church  unity  as  a  French  paper  did 
some  twenty  years  ago,  Rome  or  Canterbury.  But 
there  are  grounds  for  the  traditional  Anglican  predi¬ 
lection  for  the  Orthodox  communion.  It  has  not  only 
negative  reasons  in  common  opposition  to  Roman 
claim  and  domination,  exalted  by  a  romantic  major  e 
longinquo  reverentia,  although  not  seldom  ideas  of  a 
closer  alliance  between  the  Anglican  and  the  Ortho¬ 
dox  communions  are  based  more  on  abstract  discussion 
of  the  ancient  creeds  and  liturgies  than  on  real  pene¬ 
tration  of  the  religious  spirit  and  of  the  state  of  things 
in  the  East  and  in  the  West. 

Celebrating  many  years  ago  the  great  week  first  in 
Rome,  then,  according  to  the  Eastern  calendar,  in 
Athens  and  Constantinople,  it  was  a  wonder  and  a 
revelation  to  my  heart  and  to  my  imagination,  al¬ 
though  the  fact  is  well-known  and  self-evident,  that 
I  went  from  the  realm  of  dogma  to  the  realm  of  the 
Greek  New  Testament,  when  by  chance  entering  a 
Church  in  Athens  on  Holy  Wednesday,  St.  John’s, 
eighteenth  chapter,  was  chanted  by  a  congregation 
still  reading  and  understanding  the  tongue  of  the 
Apostles  without  translation.  But  another  difference 

1  See  “La  question  de  VJJnion  des  Eglises  entre  Grecs  et 
Latins  in  Revue  d’histoire  ecklesiastique  of  Louvain,”  1921- 
1922. 


118 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


also  struck  me.  On  Good  Friday  God  reproaches  his 
people  through  the  Prophet:  “My  people,  what  have 
I  done  unto  thee  ?  And  wherein  have  I  wearied  thee  ? 
Tell  me !  Is  it  because  I  brought  thee  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt  that  thou  hast  prepared  the  Cross  for  your 
Saviour  ?  ’  ’  The  only  answer  of  contrite  hearts  in  the 
West  is  the  adoring  supplication:  Sanctus  Deus, 
sanctus  immortalis,  miserere  nobis. 

In  the  East  the  improperia  imply  no  self-condemna¬ 
tion.  No,  the  reproach  hits  the  Jews;  the  Lord  turns 
from  them  to  the  Gentiles:  “Read  that,  0  Lord,  to 
the  Jews:  0,  My  people,  what  have  I  done  unto  thee? 
And  wherein  have  I  wearied  thee?  For  my  loving 
you,  you  have  fastened  Me  on  the  Cross.  I  cannot 
bear  it  any  more.  I  shall  call  on  the  heathen  nations, 
and  they  will  praise  Me  with  the  Father  and  the 
Spirit.  And  I  shall  give  them  eternal  life.”  Before 
the  improperia  the  antiphony  invokes  God’s  revenge 
on  the  Jews,  that  He  may  give  them  according  to 
their  deeds. 

Have  not  Constantinople  and  Canterbury  a  common 
aversion  to  tyranny,  extravagant  claims,  and  a  sec¬ 
tarian,  exclusive  spirit?  In  any  case  there  exist  also 
positive  affinities,  due  partly  to  the  fact  that  not  only 
the  Greek  of  Sophocles  and  Plato  but  also  the  Greek 
Fathers  found  their  adopted  home  in  England  as 
nowhere  else  in  the  West.  I  do  not  know  if  I  am 
approximately  right  when  I  try  to  sum  up  such  af¬ 
finities  under  four  heads : 

(1)  A  mild  conservatism  that  takes  its  norm  in  the 
earlier  centuries  against  the  violently  differentiating 
novelties  of  later  Church  history  in  the  West. 


WAYS  TO  UNITY  119 

(2)  An  episcopacy  more  akin  to  the  ancient  order 
of  the  Church  than  in  the  Roman  communion. 

(3)  Close  connection  with  a  state,  a  culture,  a  lan¬ 
guage;  between  the  Orthodox  communion  and  the 
sway  of  Greek  culture;  between  the  Anglican  com¬ 
munion  and  the  spread  of  the  British  Empire. 

(4)  By  the  side  of  Rome  the  patriarchate  in  the 
Phanar  of  Constantinople  and  the  see  of  Canterbury 
constitute  the  two  most  eminent  services  in  the 
Church,  if  we  combine  history  with  real  significance 
and  possibilities  for  the  future. 

Speaking  in  an  earlier  chapter  of  the  conservative 
reform  programme  of  Erasmus  and  his  congenial 
spirits  in  the  Church,  we  saw  that  the  genius  of 
Anglicanism  is  certainly  more  comprehensive,  but 
less  creative,  than  the  two  other  views  of  Christianity 
— that  of  Rome  (enriched  by  the  passionate  Church 
ideal  of  the  Spanish  monk)  and  that  of  Wittenberg. 
In  each  of  these  the  problem  of  Church  unity  has 
become  acute  in  a  different  way. 

The  history  and  the  divisions  of  the  Church  have 
strongly  emphasized  the  central  position  of  Rome, 
Geneva,  and  Wittenberg,  for,  as  a  non-German  and 
non-Lutheran  writer  has  said,  the  history  of  mankind 
once  wended  its  way  along  the  long,  broad  highway 
leading  from  the  Augustine  monastery  to  the  castle  in 
Wittenberg.  Mankind  will  never  forget  this  journey. 
By  rights,  the  whole  of  Occidental  Christendom  should 
have  pressed  forward  on  this  road,  as  it  once  followed 
St.  Augustine,  St.  Bernard,  and  St.  Francis,  but 
faint  or  foolish  hearts  stopped  behind.  The  ways 
parted.  Then  new  ways  have  been  struck  out.  Truth 


120 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


and  spirit  mean  more  than  external  unity.  Divisions 
have  not  seldom  meant  fresh  spiritual  power,  a  neces¬ 
sity,  and  a  progress.  Is  it  God’s  plan  that  the  roads 
shall  meet?  Is  Wittenberg,  now  regarded  by  the 
greater  part  of  Christendom  as  a  sign  of  discord,  to 
become  a  sign  of  reconciliation? 

We  touch  here  upon  a  vital  question  concerning 
the  present  and  the  future  of  our  Evangelic  com¬ 
munions  and  the  whole  of  the  Christian  Church.  The 
question  of  the  unity  already  existent  and  the  neces¬ 
sary  reconciliation  of  Christendom  are  inevitable,  yet 
repellent  to  many,  as  it  is  always  unpleasant  to  upset 
what  is  firmly  established  by  habit,  in  this  case  our 
actual  short-sighted  division.  And,  in  truth,  human 
enthusiasm  can  do  little  or  rather  nothing  in  this  re¬ 
spect,  if  at  the  depth  of  our  hearts  we  do  not  dis¬ 
cover  a  dime  spiritual  unity,  and,  further,  if  we  do 
not  see  that  the  already  existent  activity  of  true  Chris¬ 
tian  love  and  conviction  must  needs  lead  to  closer 
fellowship. 

Rome  is  the  name  of  the  strongest  and  most  impor¬ 
tant  institution  known  to  the  religious  history  of  the 
world.  Wittenberg  and  Geneva,  on  the  other  hand, 
represent  the  Word  and  personalities  penetrated  by 
the  Word:  the  German  prophet  of  Christendom  and 
his  follower,  the  great  Frenchman,  who  developed 
Luther’s  free  and  unbounded  faith  in  God  into  an 
imposing  theological  system,  and  into  a  world-con¬ 
quering  moral  rule  and  Church  organization. 

Will  the  reconciliation  of  the  Church  take  place  in 
the  sign  of  Rome  or  in  the  sign  of  Wittenberg?  I 
am  not  referring  to  a  competition  between  two  great 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


121 


spiritual  powers  like  Roman  and  Evangelic  Chris¬ 
tendom.  This  competition  should  be  noble,  but  is  un¬ 
fortunately  very  often  more  worldly-wise,  deceitful, 
and  inconsiderate  than  worthy  of  Christian  faith. 
Successes  and  failures  occur  on  both  sides.  Neither 
conversions  to  Evangelic  religion  nor  Rome’s  po¬ 
litical  successes  reveal  to  us  the  true  state  of  things. 
What  happens  in  the  soul  of  man?  Spiritual  things 
should  be  judged  spiritually.  I  mean  the  method  of 
Rome  and  the  Wittenberg  method. 

THE  METHOD  OF  ABSORPTION 

The  first,  the  method  of  Rome,  may  be  called  the 
institutional,  or  rather  the  method  of  absorption. 
There  are  in  Christendom  many  little  sects  which  in 
their  confessional  as  well  as  institutional  exclusiveness 
and  perfection  expect  all  Christians  to  think,  act,  and 
organize  themselves  exactly  as  they  do.  Such  com¬ 
munions  claim  for  themselves  a  monopoly  of  salvation 
and  divine  recognition.  According  to  this  view,  the 
unity  of  the  Church  can  only  be  accomplished  by  all 
the  other  communions’  abolishing  their  holy  doctrines 
and  ceremonies  in  order  to  join  the  only  Saving  sect. 
If  the  great  Evangelic  sections  ever  put  forward 
such  a  claim  they  have  long  ago  dismissed  it  to  the 
lumber-room — now  a  museum — being  inspired  by  the 
message  of  love  and  faith,  the  message  preached  of 
old  by  the  Saviour  and  St.  Paul  and  revived  in  the 
Church  from  time  to  time.  But  this  absorbing  unity 
is  insisted  upon  by  Rome,  perhaps  more  in  the  name 
of  the  institution  than  in  the  name  of  the  doctrine. 


122 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


The  classical  metaphor  was  created  by  the  great  Rus¬ 
sian  theologian,  Nicolas  Glubokowsky,  when  he  used 
as  a  simile  the  Russian  room  that  is  divided  into  sev¬ 
eral  compartments  by  low  partitions.  Rome  wants 
to  move  the  partitions  so  as  to  leave  no  room  for  the 
other  spiritual  homes  of  Christendom,  but  make  them 
all  remove  to  Rome.  First,  Such  a  method  is  in  op¬ 
position  to  the  Gospel;  secondly,  it  has  no  chance  of 
success,  as  proved  by  the  history  of  the  Church. 

THE  METHOD  OF  FAITH 

We  can  leave  the  partitions  standing  so  that  each 
one  may  be  at  home  in  the  familiar  forms  of  his  own 
service  and  Church  life.  But  in  every  room  of  the 
Christian  family  the  Spirit  of  God  must  accomplish 
His  work  of  continual  chastening  and  repentance 
through  the  Word,  that  we  may  all  advance  in  faith, 
hope,  and  love,  and  thus  be  able  confidently  to  com¬ 
mune  with  each  other  over  the  partitions. 

This  latter  method  I  call  the  Wittenberg  method. 
“To  form  sects  serves  no  good  purpose,  and  does  not 
help, ’ ’  said  Luther  in  his  Invocavit  sermons.  Luther’s 
act  of  burning  the  decretals  and — with  trembling 
hand — the  papal  bull  of  excommunication  may  be  in¬ 
terpreted  thus:  “It  was  said  by  them  of  old  time: 
Thou  shalt  live  according  to  statutes;  but  I  say  unto 
you,  Thou  shalt  live  by  faith  in  freedom  and  love.” 
When  he  came  back  to  Wittenberg  in  March,  1522, 
from  Wartburg  to  preach  through  his  Invocavit  week, 
fulfilling  his  purely  spiritual  calling  with  wonderfully 
courageous  devotion  and  lucidity,  then  this  meant: 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


123 


“You  who  say:  ‘We  must  break  the  statutes  and 
abolish  them/  you  believe  that  you  preach  reforma¬ 
tion.  But  I  say  unto  you:  ‘You  remain  slaves  of  the 
old  order  of  things.’  ‘No  commandment  must  be 
made  out  of  freedom.’  ‘For  faith  without  love  is  not 
enough,  nay,  it  is  no  faith,  but  a  semblance  of  faith.’  ” 
Fundamental  unity  is  inseparable  from  our  duty 
as  Christians  and  it  belongs  to  our  Saviour’s  promise. 
“When  the  Spirit  of  truth  is  come,  He  shall  guide  you 
into  all  the  truth.”  Sacred  and  great  is  our  task  to 
learn  from  one  another,  to  be  taught  by  the  Spirit 
through  each  other,  in  order  finally  to  become  of  one 
mind,  not  only  in  love,  but  also  in  the  doctrinal  ex¬ 
pressions  for  the  revealed  truth,  and  to  sit  all  together 
at  our  Saviour ’s  feet,  listening  to  His  voice  with  burn¬ 
ing  hearts. 


Unity  and  Faith 

There  is  therefore  something  of  the  promise  of  the 
Spirit  in  the  noble  movement  for  reconciliation  in 
faith  and  Church  organization,  begun  by  the  American 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  and  also  in  the  hearty 
appeal  addressed  to  Christendom  by  the  Anglican 
Lambeth  Conference,  which  appeal,  if  we  consider  the 
divergent  opinions  within  the  Anglican  Church, 
strikes  one  as  a  spiritual  wonder.  In  leading  and 
favouring  that  earnest  movement  for  unity  of  Faith 
and  Order,  the  Erasmian  section  of  the  Church,  i.e., 
the  Anglican  communion,  fulfils  its  own  old  tradi¬ 
tions. 

Our  unity  is  necessary,  but  it  must  be  carried  out 
in  a  spirit  of  truth  and  thoroughness.  We  must  there- 


124 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


fore  be  glad  that  this  conference  for  Faith  and  Order 
has,  as  writes  a  teacher  of  the  Church,  Dr.  Ludwig 
Ihmels,  the  Bishop  Elect  of  Saxony,  “the  courage  to 
go  to  the  bottom  of  things,  and  earnestly  rings  with 
the  thought  of  uniting  all  the  different  Churches  into 
one  fellowship — really  and  intimately  one  in  faith.” 

The  fact — again  revealed  to  us  by  Luther — that  the 
condition  for  our  salvation  is  quite  free  from  any 
form  of  law,  will  remain  our  sacred  inheritance,  never 
to  be  relinquished,  which — for  the  sake  of  the  peace 
of  our  souls — we  cannot  and  must  not  in  any  way 
belittle  or  obscure.  As  Luther  writes  in  the  Articles 
of  Schmalkalden  that  these  articles  “concern  the  of¬ 
fice  and  work  of  Jesus  Christ  or  our  redemption,” 
which  “can  be  gained  by  no  kind  of  work,  law  or 
merit,”  “from  this  article  we  cannot  depart,  nor  de¬ 
tract  anything,  though  heaven  and  earth  fall.  ’  ’  Here 
hold  good  Luther’s  words  that  love  endureth  all 
things ;  faith,  on  the  other  hand,  is  like  the  eye,  not 
being  able  to  endure  a  grain  of  dust.  The  Cross  of 
Christ  is  a  uniting  power  above  all  differences.  This 
is  a  fact  that  we  have  been  impressing  upon  ourselves 
and  each  other  all  through  the  war.  But  the  Cross  is 
also  a  stumbling-block,  a  distinguishing  mark,  a  point 
of  separation  between  those  who  keep  their  station  at 
the  Cross,  and  those  who  keep  far  away  from  it.  It 
is  consistent  with  our  task  in  Christendom  to  preach 
this  true  doctrine  and  practice  it  in  deeds.  This  doc¬ 
trine  must  needs  be  revealed  to  and  recognized  by  the 
whole  of  Christendom. 

Is  it  necessary  for  me  first  to  prove  to  you  that 
only  this  true  doctrine,  the  Wittenberg  method,  can 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


125 


bring  about  the  unity  of  faith  of  the  Church?  If  an 
actual  institution,  a  certain  establishment  with  its 
statutes,  were  to  be  made  a  condition  for  reconcilia¬ 
tion,  then  such  a  reconciliation  could  only  be  accom¬ 
plished  by  other  Christians  ’  not  only  losing  their  own 
holy  spiritual  homes,  but  also  being  unfaithful  to  the 
Christian  faith.  Our  reconciliation  can  only  be  real¬ 
ized  as  spiritual  unity  in  the  multitude  of  different 
forms  of  conceptions. 

If,  in  the  fundamental  conditions  for  our  unity,  any 
one  is  tempted  to  include  a  certain,  not  quite  purely 
Evangelic,  view  of  the  ministry  of  the  Word  and  its 
administration  in  the  Church,  I  may  be  allowed  to 
illustrate  the  position  of  our  section  of  the  Church  by 
means  of  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  often  referred  to  by 
me  in  discussions  on  this  subject.  He  wrote  to  those 
who  could  not  understand  his  evangelic  freedom, 
that  he  counted  his  descent  from  the  tribe  of  Ben¬ 
jamin  and  his  earnest,  zealous  Pharisaism  to  be  a 
loss  for  the  excellency  of  the  knowledge  of  Christ 
Jesus  his  Lord  (Phil.  3 :  5-8).  If  anybody  had  under¬ 
stood  him  to  mean  that  it  was  all  the  same  to  him 
wdiether  he  were  a  Sadducee  or  a  Pharisee,  uncircum¬ 
cised  or  circumcised,  a  Gentile  or  a  Jew,  of  the  tribe 
of  Benjajnin  or  of  any  other  tribe,  do  you  think  that 
he  would  have  indifferently  agreed?  No,  he  was 
thankful  for  and  proud  of  his  descent  and  the  serious¬ 
ness  of  his  life.  But  what  things  were  gain  to  him, 
these  he  counted  loss  for  Christ. 

The  continuity  of  the  Church,  the  never  broken  suc¬ 
cession  of  the  ecclesiastical  office,  is  to  us  in  my  native 
country  a  precious  and  binding  proof  of  the  faithful- 


126 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


ness  of  God;  yet  we  must  count  it  a  loss  for  the  ex¬ 
cellency  of  the  knowledge  of  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord. 

As  we  stated  at  the  Anglo-Swedish  Church  Con¬ 
ference  in  Upsala,  1909,  “We  look  upon  our  Church’s 
special  forms  and  traditions,  not  only  with  a  pious 
regard  which  is  due  to  an  honourable  heritage  from 
our  forebears,  but  as  an  endowment,  entrusted  to  us 
by  the  God  of  history.”  The  value  of  episcopacy  was 
accentuated  by  Laurentius  Petri  in  his  Church  Ordi¬ 
nance  of  1571:  “Wherefore  as  this  law  was  most 
useful,  and  without  doubt  proceeded  from  God,  the 
Holy  Spirit,  the  Giver  of  all  goodness,  it  was  also 
universally  accepted  and  approved  over  the  whole  of 
Christendom,  and  has  ever  since  been  and  ever  must 
be,  so  long  as  the  world  endureth ;  albeit  abuses,  which 
have  been  exceeding  great  herein,  as  in  all  other  of 
those  beneficial  and  needful  things,  must  be  doffed.” 
And  there  is  in  our  section  of  the  Church  no  room 
for  the  slightest  doubt  about  the  unbroken  continuity 
of  what  has  been  called  apostolic  succession. 

Still  no  thought  is  here  implied  of  a  divine  and  un¬ 
conditional  law.  The  same  Church  law  rejects  any 
fundamental  distinction  between  the  essence  of  a 
bishop’s  office  and  that  of  a  priest.  Our  Church  can¬ 
not  upon  principle  admit  separate  gradations  in  that 
office  which  is  needful  for  her  function  of  extending 
the  revelation  of  God  to  the  soul  of  mankind.  Organ¬ 
ization  displays  its  suitability  only  according  as  this 
aim  is  promoted.  No  regulation  is  ideal,  but  our  his¬ 
tory  proves,  as  we  have  seen,  the  immense  advantage 
gained  by  the  Church  from  episcopacy.  Therefore 
we  value  it  highly. 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


127 


Bishop  is  not  only  a  name,  long  established  from  the 
Bible  and  Christian  antiquity,  but  it  ought  always  to 
denote  a  spiritual  task  in  the  Church,  a  service,  not  an 
office,  a  cure  of  souls,  no  lordship  over  the  faith  or 
of  the  faithful,  but  a  help  to  their  joy,  not  an  in¬ 
spection  but  a  serving  fraternity  in  the  common  priest¬ 
hood  of  all  believers,  according  to  the  hierarchy  out¬ 
lined  by  St.  Paul  in  I  Cor.  3:21-23.  “Paul  and 
Apollos  and  Cephas  and  all  the  other  servants  of  the 
Church  are  yours  and  you  are  Christ’s  and  Christ  is 
God’s.” 

Episcopacy  means  further  a  consecration  for  life¬ 
time  to  an  effective  responsibility  that  never  ceases 
and  that  is  bound,  therefore,  without  being  asked  and 
without  asking  to  fulfil  the  cravings  of  the  Christian 
conscience  in  the  utmost  degree  in  doing  things  that 
ought  to  be  done  and  leaving  undone  what  ought  not 
to  be  done. 

Episcopacy  symbolizes  the  independence  of  the 
spiritual  communion;  therefore  the  bishop  must  be 
elected,  not  appointed  without  election.  And  the 
episcopal  service  should  be  strengthened  and  regulated 
by  responsible  collaborators  in  a  constitutional  order. 

The  bishop  as  such  does  not  belong  only  to  the  one 
nation  or  the  other,  to  the  one  religious  body  or  the 
other.  The  Moravians  sought  for  episcopal  ordination 
in  the  Waldensian  Church  because  they  considered  the 
episcopate  as  a  bond  between  themselves  and  the  uni¬ 
versal  Church. 

Speaking  of  the  development  of  episcopacy,  Dr. 
Headlam  writes:  “A  bishop  was  the  officer,  not  merely 
of  the  local  Church,  but  of  the  Catholic  Church. 


128 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Therefore  the  Church,  as  a  whole,  must  take  part  in 
his  consecration,  and  to  secure  this  the  rule  grew  up 
that  not  fewer  than  three  bishops  of  other  Churches 
must  be  present  and  take  part  in  the  ceremony.  This 
rule  was  successful.  The  unity  of  the  Church  was 
preserved  by  a  strong  system  of  order.  The  local 
Church  was  made  conspicuously  a  part  of  the  whole 
Catholic  Church,  and  each  generation  was  solemnly, 
by  the  visible  sign  of  succession,  connected  with  past 
generations.  As  a  sign  of  the  unity  and  continuity 
of  the  Church  the  fact  of  apostolic  succession  has  been 
of  supreme  value.’ ’ 

Still  to-day  the  episcopal  office  designates  a  man  as 
a  responsible  servant  in  the  Church  as  a  whole.  Mani- 
fold  and  touching  are  the  testimonies  that  have 
reached  me  as  well  as  other  servants  of  the  communion 
during  the  war — testimonies  telling  often  in  the  most 
unexpected  and  touching  way  that  the  bishop  does 
not  mean  only  a  diocesan  pastor  of  the  Greek  or  the 
Roman  or  the  Lutheran  or  the  Anglican  or  the  Metho¬ 
dist  faith,  but  simply  a  responsible  brother  in  Christ’s 
community.  That  charge  represents  essentially  the 
unity  of  the  Church. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  episcopacy  (in  the  constitu¬ 
tional  form)  is  being  introduced  in  the  national  com¬ 
munions,  which,  since  the  revolution,  have  adopted 
a  radically  democratic  order  of  self-government,  as  in 
Esthonia,  Latvia,  Saxony,  Mecklenburg,  etc.  “It  is 
necessarily  required  that  there  should  be  an  organiza¬ 
tion  (an  organized  service  in  the  Church).”  The 
value  of  every  organization  of  the  “  minister ium  ec- 
clesiasticum and  of  the  Church  in  general,  is  only 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


129 


to  be  judged  by  its  fitness  and  ability  to  become  a 
pure  vessel  for  the  supernatural  contents,  and  a  per¬ 
fect  channel  for  the  way  of  divine  revelation  unto 
mankind.”  The  quod  is  necessary,  but  not  the 
quomodo.  All  such  institutions  have  their  worth, 
according  as  they  are  adopted  powerfully  and  ur¬ 
gently  to  bring  the  message  of  salvation  to  the  souls 
of  men.  The  statutes,  offices,  and  forms  of  the 
Church  are  not  an  object  in  view,  but  are  only  the 
means  to  instil  the  forgiveness  of  God  into  human 
hearts,  that  nobody  may  live  desolate  and  miserable 
in  ignorance  of  the  fact  that  he  has  a  Father  in 
heaven,  and  that — for  his  sake — Jesus  laboured  and 
taught  and  suffered  and  lives  and  reigns  eternally. 

We  thank  Thee,  0  God,  that  Thou  hast  redeemed 
us,  and  lettest  us  serve  in  Thy  congregation.  But  Thy 
service  is  a  holy  service.  0  Lord,  sanctify  our  hearts, 
words,  and  lives.  Make  us  undefiled  vessels  for  Thy 
eternal  love  and  truth. 

How  the  service  in  the  congregation  is  to  be  organ¬ 
ized  depends  on  various  circumstances.  Do  we  not 
perceive  that  such  a  unity  can  be  accomplished  solely 
through  the  principle  defended  by  Luther  on  two 
fronts — the  principle  of  evangelic  salvation  and 
freedom  as  against  every  form  of  statutory  reli¬ 
gion? 

When  Martin  Luther,  led  by  God  to  the  painful 
discovery  of  statutory  hindrances  to  the  soul’s  trust¬ 
ful  and  free  communion  with  God,  current  in  the 
Church  of  his  time,  had  clearly  manifested  the  Evan¬ 
gelic  principle  against  Rome,  tidings  came  to  his 
refuge  at  Wartburg  of  enthusiastic  adherents  and 


130 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


would-be  consistent  reformers  in  Wittenberg,  who 
smashed  images  in  the  Churches  and  introduced  into 
public  worship  changes  offensive  to  tender  con¬ 
sciences.  That  seemed  to  be  real  and  effective  reform. 
But  Luther  thought  otherwise.  He  alone  saw  the 
way.  The  Romans  said  that  such  and  such  ceremonies 
and  things  are  necessary  for  salvation.  The  oppo¬ 
nents  said  that  to  forbid  and  destroy  such  ceremonies 
and  things  is  necessary  for  salvation.  Luther  said 
that  to  establish  necessity,  when  charity  and  wisdom 
should  be  used,  is  against  the  sufficiency  and  the  free¬ 
dom  of  the  Gospel.  Iconolatry  and  iconoclasm  were  to 
him  equally  misled.  To  others  they  appeared  as  con¬ 
trasts  ;  to  him,  as  different  violations  of  the  royal  law 
of  love  and  grace.  Our  Archbishop  Laurentius  wrote 
in  1566,  “The  enemy  cometh  again  with  large  haste, 
and  now  assaileth  us  upon  the  other  flank  .  .  .  and 
decry  us  for  open  papists  ...  in  that  we  permit  in 
our  congregations  certain  ceremonies  which  have  been 
wont  and  still  are  among  papisticals.  ”  Without  a 
clear,  unprejudiced  understanding  of  this  principal 
point  of  our  creed,  all  efforts  to  bring  about  unity  of 
the  Church  will  be  unevangelical  and  without  any 
chance  of  success. 

In  an  appealing,  well-balanced  lecture  at  the  Gen¬ 
eral  Lutheran  Conference  at  Greiz  on  August  4,  1921, 
— a  lecture  that  ought  to  become  known  to  all  those 
who  are  zealous  for  the  unity  of  the  Church — Dr. 
Ihmels,  the  trusted  spokesman  for  Lutheranism,  ex¬ 
pressed  a  hope  which  undoubtedly  is  just;  namely, 
that  the  old  Gospel,  “Believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved,”  will  find  an  echo  in 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


131 


the  hearts  of  all  those  who  really  and  fundamentally 
live  by  this  faith  in  Christ.  When  last  year,  in  South 
India,  the  Bishop  of  Skara  had  given  a  lecture  ex¬ 
pounding  the  characteristic  features  of  Evangelic 
Lutheranism,  an  English  Nonconformist  came  up  and 
said  to  Professor  L.  P.  Larsen,  “I  did  not  know  that 
I  was  a  Lutheran/’  What  we  justly  call  the  true 
Evangelic  doctrine  is  clear  not  only  to  our  Pres¬ 
byterian,  Methodist,  and  Reformed  brethren,  but  also 
to  many  others.  Without  human  intention,  but  by 
God’s  providence,  it  occurred  that  all  those  who  at 
Geneva  decided  on  a  conference  for  the  united  Life 
and  Work  of  Christendom  were  clear  and  unanimous 
on  that  fundamental  principle. 

By  doctrine  I  do  not  mean  here  a  system.  Certainly 
truth  is  a  unity  and  is  defined  in  each  separate  point. 
But  revelation  comes  to  us  not  in  the  form  of  a  sys¬ 
tem,  but  by  Prophets  and  Apostles  and  by  Jesus 
Christ,  the  fulfiller  of  the  Prophets  and  the  master 
of  the  Apostles.  However  highly  we  may  esteem  and 
admire  the  attempts  to  develop  truth  into  a  logical 
whole  of  doctrines,  we  must  see  that  human  imper¬ 
fection,  one-sidedness,  and  limitation  encroach  upon 
the  universality  of  any  such  theological  structure,  no 
matter  how  grandiose  and  impressive  it  may  be.  Con¬ 
sequently  we  cannot  agree  with  the  papacy’s  modern 
elevation  of  Thomas  Aquinas  to  the  standard  ec¬ 
clesiastical  teacher  of  all  time,  although  we  admire, 
even  more  than  Notre  Dame  of  Paris  or  the  Cologne 
Cathedral,  his  creation,  which,  especially  in  the  Evan¬ 
gelic  section  of  the  Church,  has  been  too  long  un¬ 
derestimated  or  unappreciated.  Just  as  little  as  we 


132 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


acknowledge  Gothic  or  Roman  or  Norman  or  any 
other  style  of  architecture  as  the  only  saving  one  can 
we  bind  the  Church  to  one  theological  system.  By 
doctrine  I  mean  the  very  principle  that  salvation  is 
not  through  man’s  feeble  works  but  through  God’s 
potent  grace  in  Jesus  Christ.  Therefore  salvation 
must  be  kept  pure  from  every  statutory  condition 
that  threatens  to  degrade  the  blessed  certainty  of  the 
poor  soul  to  the  uncertainty  of  human  things  and 
deeds. 

A  cloud  of  witnesses  can  be  adduced  from  Jesus 
and  Paul  to  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and 
York’s  committee,  with  representatives  of  the  English 
Free  Churches,  testifying,  March,  1918,  that  “the 
visible  unity  of  the  Body  of  Christ  is  quite  compatible 
with  a  rich  diversity  in  life  and  worship.”  Augus¬ 
tine  in  his  Confessions  says,  “It  is  not  necessary  for 
the  true  unity  of  the  Christian  Church  that  uniform 
traditions  or  rites  or  ceremonies  instituted  by  men 
should  be  held  everywhere.”  Or  in  the  text  of  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles  of  Religion:  “It  is  not  necessary 
that  traditions  and  ceremonies  be  in  all  places  one,  or 
utterly  alike,  for  at  all  times  they  have  been  divers, 
and  may  be  changed  according  to  the  diversities  of 
countries,  times,  and  men’s  manners,  so  that  nothing 
be  ordained  against  God’s  Word.”  “Every  particu¬ 
lar  or  national  Church  hath  authority  to  ordain, 
change,  and  abolish,  ceremonies  or  rites  of  the  Church 
ordained  only  by  man’s  authority,  so  that  all  things 
be  done  to  edifying.”  Dr.  H.  K.  Carroll  explains 
the  same  idea  in  his  “Primer  of  Church  Unity.”  A 
uniform  system  is  not  needed  for  unity  either  in  doc- 


WAYS  TO  UNITY  133 

trinal  statements  or  in  Church  government  and  dis¬ 
cipline. 

It  is  moreover  incomplete  and  misleading  to  imag¬ 
ine  that  we  can  solve  the  problem  of  unity  with  the 
venerable  formulas  of  the  Church.  Any  one  who,  like 
myself,  has  enjoyed  the  great  privilege  of  devoting 
the  best  years  and  powers  of  life  to  the  study  of  re¬ 
ligion,  cannot  help  appreciating  the  creeds  at  their  full 
value.  But  they  do  not  say  everything.  The  prob¬ 
lem  is  a  different  one  in  our  days.  We  must  not  at¬ 
tach  too  much  weight  to  formulas,  however  important 
they  may  be.  The  work  of  the  Spirit  goes  on  con¬ 
tinually  in  the  Church  and  that  work  of  the  Spirit 
acknowledges  no  confessional  boundaries.  ‘  ‘  Thoughts 
are  toll-free,”  wrote  Olaus  Petri.  The  confessional 
frontiers  are  overstepped  by  differences  that  exist 
practically  everywhere  and  by  problems  and  ideas  that 
occupy  all  the  communions  in  our  Western  civiliza¬ 
tion. 

Divisions  Overstep  Denominational  Frontiers 

The  same  divisions  are  to  be  found  in  every  part 
of  the  Church.  Differences  in  outlook  and  insight  do 
not  coincide  with  denominations.  “In  every  great 
religious  body  there  are  representatives  of  every  type 
of  Christian  belief.”  This  is  true  in  a  special  sense 
of  ideas  that  make  mutual  recognition  and  spiritual 
unity  either  possible  or  impossible.  Let  us  take  up 
the  fundamental  difference  with  regard  to  Church 
unity. 

Where  is  the  frontier  in  Christendom?  Where  is 
the  frontier  between  the  greater  and  smaller  pros- 


134 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


pects  for  the  work  of  unification?  Especially  within 
Anglicanism,  but  even  in  other  quarters  much  stress 
has  been  laid  on  the  difference  between  episcopal  and 
non-episcopal  communities,  the  former  comprising  the 
greater  and  older  portion  of  Christendom,  the  latter 
including  much  of  the  best  power  of  faith  and  chari¬ 
table  activity  in  the  Church.  The  joint  committee  of 
the  Church  and  Nonconformists,  which  during  the  war 
put  forth  in  England  important  propositions  with 
cordial  mutual  recognition,  started  out  from  the  same 
division  between  the  episcopal  portion  of  Christendom 
and  religious  communions  without  any  episcopal  con¬ 
stitution. 

Is  the  frontier  really  here?  As  between  episcopal 
and  non-episcopal  Methodists?  Did  the  Church  in 
Esthonia  or  in  Latvia  or  in  Saxony  cross  the  frontiers 
when  their  superintendents  became  bishops?  Does  it 
mean  so  much  if  one  uses  a  Latin  or  a  Greek  word? 
Does  it  mean  so  much  if  one  uses  the  Biblical  term 
episkopos  (bishop)  or  some  other  one ?  No.  The  real 
frontier  is  within  the  episcopal  part  of  the  Church  be¬ 
tween  those  who  consider  a  certain  external  order,  here 
the  historic  episcopal  office,  necessary  for  the  true  con¬ 
gregation  of  Christ  and  for  the  unity  of  the  Church, 
and  those  who  do  not.  The  former  favour  statutory 
religion,  the  latter  have  an  Evangelic  view.  The 
former  group  has  its  strong  and  consistent  prototype 
in  Rome,  which  identifies  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
with  its  hierarchy  and  sacrament  with  God’s  king¬ 
dom  on  earth,  and  which  must  therefore  consistently 
demand  that  every  true  Christian  shall  abandon  his 
own  spiritual  home  and  range  himself  beneath  the 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


135 


dominion  of  the  Pope  and  his  bishops.  But  there  is 
something  of  the  same  spirit  wherever  episcopacy  or 
the  unbroken  succession  of  bishops  through  the  ages 
is  made  an  essential  condition  for  the  unity  of  the 
Church. 

A  difference  must  be  made  here  between  what  is 
precious  to  us  but  unessential  and  what  is  essential, 
in  other  words,  between  that  which  belongs  to  God’s 
other  good  gifts  and  the  one  thing  needful. 

Quite  the  same  frontier  passes  through  that  part  of 
Christendom  that  has  no  bishops.  I  have  no  reason 
here  to  enter  in  detail  upon  the  different  kinds  of 
Church  organization.  There  are  different  types  in  the 
communions  that  have  no  episcopacy.  The  two  most 
important  types  are  the  Presbyterian,  based  on  elders, 
and  the  Congregational,  based  on  the  separate  con¬ 
gregations  combined  in  the  form  of  an  association. 
All  these  differences  are  secondary.  If  it  is  held  that 
the  New  Testament  prescribes  a  certain  definite  or¬ 
ganization  of  the  Church,  then  one  is  on  the  same  side 
of  the  boundary  whether  one  wishes  to  have  bishops 
or  elders  or  the  form  of  union  or  papal  autocracy. 
Within  the  non-episcopal  part  of  Christendom  too  the 
frontier  passes  between  those  who  demand  a  certain 
external  form  and  those  who  say  that  no  special  form 
of  the  Church  is  prescribed  in  the  Word  of  God. 

One  can  adduce  reasons  of  tradition  and  experience 
for  both  these  forms.  The  one  says :  My  form  of  com¬ 
munion  best  serves  Christ’s  Gospel.  The  other  says: 
No,  my  form  of  communion  is  the  best  vessel  for  the 
truth.  But  they  can  both  maintain  that  the  true  con¬ 
gregation  of  Christ  is  found  in  one  as  well  as  in  the 


136 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


other.  The  revered  Baptist  leader,  Dr.  J.  H.  Shake¬ 
speare,  writes,  “I  regard  it  as  a  waste  of  time  to  seek 
to  bring  about  reunion  on  any  other  than  the  basis  of 
constitutional  episcopacy/’  although  episcopacy  does 
not  exist  in  his  section  of  the  Church.  The  unity  of 
the  Church  can  be  brought  about  without  her  organ¬ 
ization’s  being  the  same  everywhere.  One  can  find 
advantages  and  disadvantages  in  every  form  of 
Church  organization.  None  is  ideal.  God  has  led  us 
in  different  paths.  Each  has  special  experiences  to 
preserve  and  make  use  of.  Unity  ought  not  to  be 
uniformity.  It  would  then  be  poorer. 

It  is  to  be  noted  in  this  connection  that  a  Scottish 
Presbyterian  insists  on  the  unbroken  connection  be¬ 
tween  his  elders  and  the  Apostles  by  means  of  the 
laying  on  of  hands  just  as  strongly  as  an  Anglican  or 
Roman  Christian  insists  on  the  apostolic  succession 
of  the  bishops.  Nevertheless  they  can  respect  the 
freedom  of  the  Gospel  and  say,  “Our  form  of  com¬ 
munion  is  tested  and  found  good,  but  it  is  not  neces¬ 
sary  for  the  true  congregation  of  Christ,  not  neces¬ 
sary  for  the  unity  of  the  Church.”  They  are  then  on 
the  same  side  of  the  frontiers  as  we  are. 

For  the  frontier  does  not  pass  between  episcopal, 
presbyterian,  and  congregational  organization,  not  be¬ 
tween  national  Church  and  corporate  Church,  not  be¬ 
tween  Established  Church  and  Free  Church,  or  what¬ 
ever  different  forms  and  connections  the  communion 
may  have  in  different  quarters,  but  the  frontier 
passes  straight  through  all  these  different  groups.  It 
divides  those  who  consider  a  certain  external  system 
necessary  from  those  who  pay  homage  to  the  freedom 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


137 


of  the  Gospel.  The  frontier  passes  between  statutory- 
religion  and  spiritual  religion.  Also  other  and  still 
more  important  divisions  overstep  confessional  fron¬ 
tiers. 

The  real  differences  in  the  realm  of  religion  are  not 
separated  by  creeds.  On  the  contrary  they  are  to  be 
found  inside  the  same  confessional  pen.  WTe  need  not 
go  so  far  as  to  remote  ages  or  communions  of  the  his¬ 
tory  of  religion  in  order  to  find  the  disparity  between 
lower  and  higher  religion,  or  even  between  primitive 
religion  and  civilized  faith.  Both  are  near  at  hand 
everywhere  in  the  larger  Christian  communions. 

But  also  rich  diversity  of  temperaments  lives  in 
almost  every  one  of  the  more  important  religious 
bodies.  Swedenborg  was  right  in  seeing  together  in 
the  other  world  men  from  epochs  and  countries,  dis¬ 
tant  in  time  and  space,  whose  souls  were  intimately 
akin,  while  even  pious  people  closely  connected  in 
creed  and  worship  remained  strangers  by  tempera¬ 
ment.  I  may  feel  so  quietly  and  instinctively  related 
in  spirit  with,  say,  an  Orthodox  priest  or,  say,  a 
thinker  who  is  not  supposed  to  be  a  Christian,  that 
we  understand  each  other  without  saying  anything 
and  feel  comfortable  together  meditating  in  silence, 
while  I  can  be  inwardly,  in  the  heart  of  my  being, 
rather  a  stranger  to  excellent  men  and  women  of 
my  own  creed  and  endeavour. 

Thus  keeping  faithful  to  truth  we  cannot  consider 
formulas  and  modes  of  worship  as  the  division  par 
excellence  in  the  Church.  We  must  dig  deeper  into 
reality. 


138 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


The  Same  Problems  Occupy  the  Church  in  All  Its 

Sections 

Some  concrete  instances  may  be  more  eloquent  than 
a  general  discussion.  Historical  investigation  of  Holy 
Writ  transcends  confessional  frontiers.  For  my  part 
I  am  not  ready  to  subscribe  without  reserve  to  the 
eschatological  interpretation  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
in  the  Gospel.  But  the  history  of  that  interpretation 
in  our  time  is  instructive.  It  proves  that  denomina¬ 
tions  do  not  mean  Chinese  walls. 

Biblical  research,  which  has  given  fresh  insight  into 
the  history  of  revelation,  numbers  in  modern  times 
the  Roman  Catholic  Richard  Simons  among  its  fa¬ 
thers,  but  its  really  great  work  was  accomplished  by 
Evangelic  investigators.  It  is  true  that  the  Roman 
Papal  Catholic  Biblical  Commission  has  decided  that 
Moses  wrote  the  whole  Pentateuch,  that  the  prophet 
Isaiah  has  written  chapters  40-66  of  the  book  called 
by  his  name,  and  that  the  statement  of  the  first  Epis¬ 
tle  of  John  about  the  three  who  bear  record  in  heaven 
is  genuine.  But  clear  views  cannot  be  repressed  by 
peremptory  decrees.  The  main  point  is  that  the 
oracular  view  of  Holy  Writ  has  given  place  to  an  in¬ 
sight  into  the  essence  of  Christianity  as  a  revealed 
religion  or  a  prophetic  revelation  in  history. 

One  discovery  proceeded  in  this  way.  Johannes 
Weiss  examined  in  the  nineties  the  question  of  how 
our  Saviour  expected  the  catastrophe,  the  advent  of 
God’s  dominion  by  force,  immediately  or  soon,  and 
how  this  expectation  explains  much  in  the  Gospels 
that  was  previously  dark  or  contradictory.  He  came 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


139 


into  conflict  with  the  accepted  view,  especially  with 
the  rationalizing  explanation  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
as  only  an  ideal  entity.  In  other  respects  too  there 
has  been  a  desire  to  alter  the  proclamation  of  Jesus 
according  to  the  measure  of  ordinary  human  under¬ 
standing.  His  eschatological  expectation  is  offensive, 
but  perhaps  leads  us  to  a  deeper  view  of  the  nature 
of  this  world  and  of  the  Christian  ideal.  The 
eschatological  view  also  occurred  to  the  German  the¬ 
ologian  Bousset,  the  French  Protestant  philosopher 
Renouvier,  and  others.  In  the  more  thorough  form  it 
had  obtained  in  Johannes  Weiss  it  influenced  a  bril¬ 
liant  young  scholar  at  Strassburg,  Albert  Schweitzer, 
a  philosopher,  theologian,  virtuoso  on  the  organ, 
musical  theorist,  who  was  a  medical  missionary  in 
Congo  at  the  outbreak  of  the  war.  He  worked  out 
the  theory  with  artistic  and  paradoxical  power. 
Every  one  had  to  listen.  Now  the  eschatological  ex¬ 
planation  has  departed  from  the  sphere  of  German 
theology. 

Loisy  in  France,  in  his  exposition  of  the  conscious¬ 
ness  of  Jesus,  gave  a  well-balanced  proportion  to  the 
expectation  of  the  impending  transformation  of  the 
world.  In  England  her  fheologus  laureatus,  Sanday 
of  Oxford,  was  convinced  and  with  his  ecclesiastical 
authority  endorsed  the  eschatological  Gospel  and  fol¬ 
lowed  the  subject  up  in  pulpits.  But  the  most  re¬ 
markable  of  all  was  what  happened  through  George 
Tyrrell,  the  religious  genius  and  martyr  of  Modern¬ 
ism,  the  Roman  Catholic  apologist  and  romanticist. 
As  a  good  Catholic  he  took  this  offensive  interpreta¬ 
tion  of  Jesus ’  proclamation  of  the  divine  kingdom; 


140 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


namely,  that  the  historical  vision  of  the  Saviour  was 
narrowly  restricted  by  the  final  catastrophe,  and  with 
it  polemized  against  what  he  called  the  rationalism  of 
Protestantism.  In  his  posthumous  book  on  4 ‘Chris¬ 
tianity  at  the  Cross-Roads”  he  made  this  expectation, 
irrational  but  concentrating  in  every  way  within  the 
personal  sphere  of  life,  appear  as  an  utterance  of 
Catholic  faith  in  the  supernatural  against  the  levelling 
rationalism  of  Protestant  theology.  The  situation  was 
really  moving.  In  its  content  Tyrrell’s  exposition  is 
powerful,  religious,  and,  in  my  opinion,  essentially 
correct.  Only  the  indication  of  its  origin  has  a 
false  label  attached.  Tyrrell  had  learned  the  matter 
from  modern  Protestant  research,  which  he  scorns. 
And  as  regards  its  affinity  with  the  Roman  spirit,  the 
author  was  excommunicated  like  Loisy.  The  instance 
shows  how  research  even  in  such  central  parts  of  the 
Christian  conception  passes  beyond  the  frontiers. 

This  is  not  the  place  to  explain  why  the  eschato¬ 
logical  view  struck  me  thirty  years  ago  as  elucidating 
in  a  somewhat  clearer  way  to  us  than  before  the  con¬ 
centration  of  our  Lord  on  every  actual  moment  of 
His  life  and  on  every  human  being  whom  He  met, 
and  His  heroic  calmness.  A  feeble  man  would  have 
hurried  and  become  nervous.  Christ  became  collected 
and  quiet,  just  as  the  engine-driver  on  the  express 
train,  the  general  in  the  decisive  moment  of  the  battle, 
or  Father  Perry,  who  observed  in  a  South  Pacific 
station  the  transit  of  the  planet  Venus  with  a  still 
more  perfect  lucidity  and  care  because  he  knew  that 
a  mortal  fever,  which  took  him  shortly  before  the 
transit,  would  kill  him  in  a  little  space  of  time. 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


141 


We  easily  forget.  Otherwise  the  apocalyptic  years 
through  wThich  we  are  still  passing  might  make  it 
easier  for  us  to  understand  the  Gospel,  as  well  as  to 
give  us  an  unexpected  and  terrible  freshness  in  the 
understanding  of  the  small  apocalypse  (Mk.  13)  and 
to  St.  John’s  Apocalypse.  Some  years  before  the  wTar 
I  had  a  delightful  talk  with  Mgr.  Duchesne  about 
eschatological  and  catastrophical  theories  in  the  his¬ 
tory  of  religion.  Suddenly  an  earthquake  disturbed 
his  exquisite  smile.  The  fine  ironist  rushed  in  fear  to 
the  wall.  When  in  about  a  minute  the  erratic  caprice 
of  our  generally  reliable  ground  was  over,  and  we 
took  up  the  conversation  again,  the  subject  seemed  to 
the  great  scholar  as  well  as  to  myself  less  mythical. 
The  earthquake  of  history  in  the  last  years  ought  to 
make  the  short  horizon  of  the  eschatology  in  the  Gos¬ 
pel  more  real  to  us.  Such  considerations  have  nothing 
to  do  with  denominational  divisions. 

The  Suffering  God 

God’s  voice  is  heard  everywhere  by  listening  hearts 
in  spite  of  confessional  walls.  Our  generation  is 
called  for  in  order  to  get  deeper  insight  into  the 
secret  of  God’s  work.  Some  fundamental  facts  be¬ 
longing  to  revelation  itself  had  been  obscured,  but 
began  in  our  generation  to  rise  to  new  importance, 
when  the  great  war  violently  made  the  problem  acute. 

Rationalistic  piety  would  purify  the  comforting 
belief  in  God’s  providence  and  just  ruling  of  the 
world  from  such  terrible  old  dogmas  as  those  about 
evil,  vicarious  suffering,  and  atonement,  dogmas  aban¬ 
doned  by  enlightened  humanity.  The  modern  dogmas 


142 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


have  failed.  Many  thought  that  our  civilization  went 
by  itself  comfortably  to  heaven.  Now  they  see  that 
it  goes  to  hell,  that  it  must  take  another  path,  in 
order  to  get  saved.  Is  evil  real  ?  The  Christian  strug¬ 
gle  against  evil  must  be  more  recognized  than  it  was 
before  the  wrar  in  modern  thought.  At  the  same  time 
the  message  of  the  Church  about  atonement,  vicarious 
suffering,  redeeming  love,  and  the  enigma  of  sacrifice 
has  become  evident  as  never  before  to  many  minds  that 
despised  such  Christian  ideas  as  foolish  antiquities 
and  that  now  see  that  those  experiences  touch  the 
very  deepest  realities  of  life. 

Must  we  not  go  a  step  further?  A  suffering  God 
seems  to  be  a  contradictio  in  cidjecto.  But  our  poor 
intellect  is  unable  to  grasp  truth  and  reality  other¬ 
wise  than  in  ultimate  postulates  which  must  be  eagerly 
scrutinized  by  reason,  but  which  perhaps  in  the  funda¬ 
mental  issue  cannot  be  but  approximately  systema¬ 
tized. 

Mankind  has  long  felt  that  suffering  is  concerned 
with  God’s  own  being.  Long  before  Moses,  some  thou¬ 
sand  years  before  the  prehistoric  chieftains  of  the 
chosen  people,  when  the  patriarchs  pastured  their 
herds  in  Canaan,  the  temples  and  the  vernal  landscape 
of  Babel  resounded  with  cries  of  distress  and  dirges 
for  the  death  of  Tammuz.  When,  five  thousand  years 
afterwards,  we  read  Zimmern’s  interpretation  of  the 
fragments  remaining  of  the  women’s  lamentations  on 
the  death  of  Dumuzi,  “the  real  son,”  or  Adon,  “the 
Lord,”  it  still  grips  our  hearts.  Then  they  rejoiced 
over  the  return  of  the  god  to  life.  The  whole  thing 
was  intended  to  promote  the  growth  of  vegetation. 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


143 


But  a  human  feeling  of  the  divine  mystery  of  suffer¬ 
ing  was  mingled  in  it,  and  we  hear  the  echo  in  many 
places,  from  the  melancholy  notes  of  the  flute  at  the 
Mexican  human  sacrifices  to  all  the  rites  in  the  Medi¬ 
terranean  countries  which  were  concerned  with  the 
death  and  resurrection  of  the  young,  redeeming  god, 
and  to  the  Balder  sage  of  the  North.  What  sort  of 
a  wild  horde  passed  along  the  streets  of  Rome  at  the 
time  of  year  that  later  became  Easter?  The  priests 
lacerated  themselves  till  the  blood  ran,  and  eastern 
instruments  accompanied  clamorous  lamentations.  It 
was  Attis  who  had  died  to  live  again. 

Now  comes  the  miracle.  Some  of  these  rites  were 
adopted  in  the  Christian  Church.  There  was  weeping 
and  wailing,  and  at  length  the  world  got  for  Good 
Friday  a  music  that  reveals  the  divine  secret  of  suf¬ 
fering  better  than  words.  But  it  was  not  a  young 
god  who  died  and  came  to  life  again  with  the  spring. 
It  was  a  man  of  flesh  and  blood.  It  was  one  who  had 
been  crucified  at  Golgotha,  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  an  his¬ 
torical  figure,  Who  now  gathered  to  Himself  the 
lamentations  throughout  all  the  thousands  of  years, 
among  all  peoples,  and  in  all  languages,  for  the  death 
of  the  God.  The  passion  was  transferred  from  the 
cult  into  history  itself. 

This  is  a  wonderful  connection.  We  link  the  New 
Testament  to  the  Old  Testament.  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  ingeniously  and  profoundly  devotes  to  Christ 
the  whole  sacrificial  system  of  Israel.  A  day  will 
come  when  the  science  of  religion  will  be  able  to  ex¬ 
plain  the  far  broader  connection  between  the  above- 
mentioned  lamentation  ceremonies  and  our  Saviour’s 


144 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


death  and  resurrection,  as  a  prophecy  and  a  fulfilment, 
as  a  type  created  by  the  longing  and  presentiments 
of  souls  until  it  became  flesh  and  blood.  The  genuine 
Old  Testament  is  only  one.  But  beside  it  there  will 
be  as  many  secondary  Old  Testaments  to  the  one  New 
Testament,  as  there  are  religions  on  the  earth.  Then 
we  shall  see  that,  strangely  enough,  Christ  fulfils  even 
the  apostate  lamentation  ceremonies  that,  according  to 
Hezekiah,  eighth  chapter,  the  women  carried  out  with 
weeping  and  wailing  for  Tammuz  at  the  temple  of 
Jerusalem,  and  that  the  Roman  soldiers  indicated  an 
inner  connection  when  they  mockingly  arrayed  Pilate’s 
Prisoner  as  a  sort  of  spring  king  with  a  mantle  and 
crown. 

However  often  my  thoughts  and  researches  have 
gone  and  go  in  this  direction  my  amazement  is  still 
just  as  fresh  and  great.  I  can  never  cease  to  medi¬ 
tate  that  our  species  from  the  most  remote  times  have 
transferred  suffering  into  the  essence  of  divinity, 
until  even  an  instrument  of  death  became  the  su¬ 
preme  symbol  of  religion — the  Cross.  The  path  of 
suffering  is  the  path  of  God.  In  these  days,  if  not 
before,  suffering  forces  its  way  into  our  conception 
of  life.  In  face  of  the  nameless  woe  caused  by  the 
World  War  it  would  be  cruelty  to  take  refuge  in  the 
idea  of  a  purpose  and  say  that  this  had  to  happen 
so  that  from  it  there  should  come  a  blessing  born  of 
pain.  But  by  a  divine  miracle  distress  actually  does 
bring  forth  a  goodness,  a  mercy,  a  reconciliation,  an 
ethical  value,  a  purification,  a  turning  to  essentials 
that  was  unsuspected  before.  No  view  of  life  can  now 
hold  good  if  it  excludes  suffering. 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


145 


During  persecution  the  Russian  Church  revealed 
qualities  that  many  did  not  credit  her  with.  When 
once  the  vicissitudes  of  Russian  religion  during  the 
terror  are  known  it  is  certain  that  this  great  and 
little  known  part  of  the  Church  will  draw  the  heart 
of  the  West  nearer  to  it. 

The  story  of  martyrdom  in  Finland  and  the  Baltic 
states  is  already  known  in  its  main  features,  and  we 
already  discern  something  of  the  harvest  that  has 
begun  to  spring  forth  from  the  sowing  of  suffering 
faith.  Quite  close  to  us  things  have  happened  that 
surpass  in  cruelty  the  persecutions  in  heathen  Rome. 
But  at  the  same  time  inhumanity  has  revealed  the 
superhuman,  calm  heroism  of  divine  confidence  and 
faith  and  has  added  new  and  unforgettable  leaves  to 
the  white-red  book  that  contains  the  history  of  suffer¬ 
ing  in  the  Christian  Church. 

The  texts  in  Isaiah,  fifty-third  chapter,  about  the 
sufferings  of  the  Lord’s  servant  have  upheld  Poland 
in  her  ruin,  until,  incredible  as  it  may  seem,  the  day 
of  resurrection  should  come. 

No  people  has  expressed  the  Redeemer’s  passion  in 
art  and  in  music  as  have  the  Germans.  The  German 
passion  music  is,  of  its  kind,  the  greatest  addition 
that  has  been  made  to  the  documents  of  revelation  in 
the  Old  and  New  Testament.  If  I  were  asked  for 
a  fifth  Gospel,  I  should  not  hesitate  to  name  the  inter¬ 
pretations  of  the  secret  of  the  redemption  that  reached 
its  climax  in  Johann  Sebastian  Bach.  I  had  previ¬ 
ously  studied  the  Passion  of  St.  Matthew  and  the 
Mass  in  B  minor.  When  for  the  first  time  I  heard 
a  dignified  performance  of  them  in  St.  Thomas’ 


146 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Church  at  Leipzig,  I  obtained  a  deeper  insight  than 
before  into  the  mystery  of  the  Passion  and  the  In¬ 
carnation. 

One  need  not  be  a  Deutero-Isaiah  to  venture  to 
predict  that  in  a  people  with  such  depths  of  soul, 
such  capacity  for  work,  and  such  passion  music,  the 
fruits  of  suffering,  if  accepted  with  attentive  obedi¬ 
ence  to  God’s  meaning,  will  ripen  to  regeneration  for 
the  fatherland  and  benefit  for  the  world. 

God  suffers.  May  one  venture  to  state:  God  Him¬ 
self  suffers?  Is  it  not  a  heathen  idea?  Paganism 
knows  how  to  relate  with  ceremonies  and  words:  a 
god,  the  god  of  life,  the  saviour-god  who  suffers  and 
dies,  arising  again  to  a  new  life.  For  paganism  the 
idea  of  a  god’s  suffering  is  easier  because  it  knows 
many  gods.  Some  of  them  may  reign  in  blessed  peace 
while  another  god  suffers.  For  Christianity,  as  for 
all  monotheism,  it  is  difficult.  There  seems  to  be  a 
contradiction.  History  and  revelation  show  us  how 
Christ,  God’s  supreme  Son,  the  real  Revealer,  suffers 
and  dies.  Dogmatics,  that  are  more  well-meaning 
and  eager  than  Biblical  and  sound,  have  emphasized 
the  divinity  of  Christ  in  a  metaphysical  way  which 
incurs  the  risk  of  crucifying  God  the  Father  and 
of  transforming  Golgotha  and  Jesus’  cry  of  anguish, 
Eli ,  Eli ,  to  a  sort  of  sham  manoeuvre  in  divinity. 

The  Christian  Church  has  always  rejected  the  con¬ 
clusion  from  the  dogma  of  the  divinity  of  Christ,  that 
God  Himself,  the  one,  sole  Almighty,  suffers.  But 
still  this  idea  comes  forth  again  in  new  forms,  al¬ 
though  it  was  already  rejected  by  the  Church  in  the 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


147 


so-called  gnostic  systems.  How  can  we  really  believe 
and  experience  the  living  God  in  history  and  human 
life  without  imagining  Him  as  suffering,  when  life 
and  history  are  so  full  of  suffering,  or,  more  correctly, 
when  what  is  new,  significant,  and  blessed  in  history 
seem  to  be  incapable  of  realization  except  through 
pain  and  death  ?  Pascal  saw  the  exalted  Saviour  still 
suffering  in  pangs  of  the  Cross  in  heaven.  Before  the 
great  war  in  our  own  times  the  doctrine  of  God ’s  suf¬ 
fering  had  thrust  itself  forward  in  the  minds  of  Wil¬ 
fred  Monod  and  other  Christian  thinkers.  The  ques¬ 
tion  has  been  asked,  first  silently  and  tremblingly, 
then  openly,  Does  God  suffer  with  us  and  for  us? 
And  the  answer  has  come,  Yes.  Amid  strife  and  pain 
God  realizes  Himself  and  His  dominion  over  the  in¬ 
sensible  order  of  nature  and  the  resistance  of  evil  and 
sloth.  It  is  a  troublesome  and  painful  path.  But 
if  we  obey  the  voice  in  our  soul  we  have  no  choice. 
We  must  surrender  to  God  in  unconditional  submis¬ 
sion.  We  must  ally  ourselves  with  Him,  take  part  in 
His  struggle  and  pain,  and,  through  the  hindrances 
of  nature,  distress,  and  sin  within  us  and  without,  be 
helped  on  by  Him  to  His  kingdom. 

Such  an  idea  is  incompatible  with  the  First  Article 
of  our  Confession  of  Faith.  But  it  has  deep  roots  in 
religious  aspiration  and  in  the  Gospel.  That  is  why 
the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass  is  so  powerful  and  attractive, 
in  spite  of  its  incompatibility  with  our  Lord’s  teach¬ 
ing.  It  is  difficult  to  give  up  the  pagan  idea  of  a 
sacrificial  priest.  With  the  priest  is  connected  the 
sacrifice.  When  it  became  impossible  to  sacrifice  ani¬ 
mals,  the  idea  was  developed,  contrary  to  the  Epistle 


148 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


to  the  Hebrews  and  the  whole  New  Testament,  of 
bloodlessly  repeating  Jesus’  sacrificial  death.  It  is 
not  a  Christian  idea.  But  why  has  the  sacrifice  of 
the  Mass  such  power?  Why  does  it  attract  so  many, 
even  outside  Roman  Catholicism?  The  answer  is  obvi¬ 
ous:  There  is  a  religious  idea  behind  it.  God  has  a 
share  in  our  suffering. 

The  truth  about  God’s  mysterious  path  has  been 
expressed  in  ways  that  are  not  satisfactory.  Is  God 
Himself  involved  in  strife,  suffering,  and  pain?  This 
idea  shows  now,  as  in  the  old  gnostic  systems  and  in 
all  the  forms  in  which  it  appears,  how  incapable  our 
thought  is  of  conceiving  and  expressing  God’s  being 
beyond  the  testimony  of  the  revelation,  that  is  above 
all,  of  Christ.  But  a  groping  and  dizzying  concep¬ 
tion  of  God  Himself  as  suffering  and  struggling  in 
the  development  of  the  world  seems  to  me  to  come 
nearer  to  the  strange,  nay,  tragic,  conditions  of  this 
existence  and  the  essence  of  Christianity  than  a  view 
that  arranges  both  God  and  the  course  of  the  world 
in  a  perfect  harmony,  where  everything  fits  in  splen¬ 
didly  from  beginning  to  end.  It  may  be  a  pity  that 
we  were  not  there  to  arrange  the  course  of  the  world, 
but,  as  it  is  now,  God’s  path  must  be  through  suf¬ 
fering,  as  must  that  of  His  congregation.  For  thou¬ 
sands  of  years  the  spirit  of  man  has  thought  of  and 
expressed  salvation  and  expiation  through  suffering 
in  passion  rites,  until  passion  was  no  longer  merely 
a  cult.  The  Man  of  Sorrows  came,  He  Who  was  also 
God’s  sanctified,  the  Lord  of  joy  and  conquering 
trust.  In  any  case  our  Christian  faith  transfers  suf¬ 
fering  quite  into  God’s  being,  provided  that  we  seri- 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


149 


ously  believe  that  Christ  is  the  real  divine  revelation. 
The  mystery  of  God’s  suffering  occupies  every  section 
of  serious  Christian  thought  to-day. 

The  Longing  for  the  Unconditional 

The  study  of  religion  and  theology  will  always  re¬ 
gard  the  epoch  in  which  we  are  still  living  as  one  of 
the  great  ages  of  religious  research.  No  gain  has  been 
more  obvious  than  the  historic  view  itself.  Stumbling 
stones  have  been  removed  that  the  Church  and  reason 
in  earlier  periods  tried  to  get  rid  of  in  vain  through 
symbolic  interpretation.  It  is  difficult  to  overrate 
what  the  historic  view  on  all  such  phenomena  that  we 
include  in  the  name  religion  means  for  a  just  ap¬ 
praisement  and  a  deeper  understanding  of  God’s 
intercourse  with  man.  But  the  historic  view  is  not 
the  last  word.  The  question  in  the  young  school  of 
bold  religious  thinkers  and  students  is  not  how  to 
understand  everything  in  its  relative  and  historic 
role,  but  to  grasp  the  absolute  itself.  Heinrich 
Scholz  rightly  writes  that  it  is  not  easy  to  find  two 
things  more  remote  from  one  another  than  religion 
and  the  doctrine  of  relativity.  One  feels  with  Bishop 
Butler  the  absurdity  in  a  view: 

“As  if  religion  were  intended 
For  nothing  else  but  to  be  mended.” 

A  brilliant  young  German  scholar  calls  this  new  trend 
in  theology  Das  Heimveh  nacli  dem  TJnbedingten  1 — 

1  See  “ Die  Gewissheit  der  Christen-Botschaft,”  by  Otto 
Schmitz,  Paul  Althaus,  Karl  Girgensohn,  Berlin  Furche-Ver- 
lag,  1922. 


150 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


“The  nostalgia  for  the  unconditioned. ”  This  new 
direction  appears  most  strongly  in  young  theological 
Germany,  where  it  has  a  centre  in  Leipzig,  and  where 
Friedrich  Heiler’s  concluding  words  in  his  great 
study  of  prayer  are  characteristic. 

The  Craving  for  Unity 

A  turning  to  the  unconditioned  and  absolute  im¬ 
plies  a  sharpened  sense  for  an  exclusive  unity  of  all 
true  believers.  The  necessity  of  unity  is  produced 
and  felt  more  deeply  by  the  lover  of  absolute  truth. 
The  longing  for  Church  unity  and  the  apprehension 
of  its  necessity  have  been  alive  in  our  generation  and 
strengthened  beyond  the  most  sanguine  expectations 
through  the  divisions  of  war. 

Notwithstanding  cruel  enmities,  hatred,  and  crimes 
in  war  and  in  peace,  I  think  that  human  solidarity 
has  never  been  so  evidently  and  deeply  recognized 
as  now.  Hard  facts  have  turned  many  hearts  to  the 
essence  of  the  Gospel.  They  constrain  the  Church  to 
contrition  and  repentance  and  to  loving  service.  But 
they  also  give  her  wonderful  tasks.  Therefore  we 
considered  it  as  a  holy  but  most  difficult  duty  to 
make  for  a  common  confession  of  the  Church  of  the 
supernational  importance  of  Christ’s  Cross  as  a 
unifying  power  already  during  the  slaughter — the 
killing  of  the  fittest — on  the  continental  altar  of 
Moloch  worship ;  will  God  change  it  into  a  Golgotha  ? 

What  is  it  that  unites  us?  The  answer  is:  The 
imitation  of  Christ.  It  certainly  ought  to  be  a  suf¬ 
ficient  communion  that  we  all,  collectively  and  indi¬ 
vidually,  wish  honestly  to  follow  in  the  footsteps  of 


WAYS  TO  UNITY  151 

the  Master,  to  be  inspired  by  His  love  and  guided  by 
His  strength. 

If  we  wish  to  be  serious  about  following  our 
Saviour,  can  we  then  still  go  in  separate  flocks?  No, 
in  common  works  of  charity  we  will  approach  one 
another,  because  we  approach  the  Saviour.  So  we 
shall  probably  see  by  degrees  something 'more  of  the 
one  Holy  Church  which  we  confess,  in  which  we  be¬ 
lieve,  to  which  belong  all  hearts  that  believe  in  Christ 
in  all  Christian  communions,  and  which  will  once 
stand  eternalized  before  the  Throne. 

But  there  is  something  else  that  unites  us  as  Chris¬ 
tians — a  faith,  a  certainty  about  things  that  are  not 
visible,  a  conviction  about  that  which  no  human  un¬ 
derstanding  can  devise  or  conceive.  When  we  are  to 
express  the  common  and  inalienable  .features  that 
every  one  assigns  to  his  Christianity  and  cannot 
separate  from  it,  we  easily  enter  upon  doctrines,  rites, 
and  orders  that  keep  us  asunder.  Tragic  is  the  fate 
of  the  sacrament  of  fellowship  which  has  become  to 
many  queer  Christians  a  shibboleth  of  separation. 
But  here  we  should  of  course  find  what  is  common, 
a  faith  that  unites  all  the  true  disciples  of  Christ, 
without  any  difference  between  confessions  and  theo¬ 
logical  schools.  We  all  believe  and  live  in  the  Father¬ 
hood  of  God.  God,  the  heavenly  Father,  in  His  un¬ 
fathomable  mercy  and  unfailing  providence,  is  our 
sure  refuge,  our  security.  It  ought  to  be  enough. 
He  who  has  God  has  everything.  “Whom  have  I  in 
heaven  but  Thee  ?  And  there  is  none  upon  earth  that 
I  desire  beside  Thee.” 

Yet  as  Christians  we  cannot  stop  even  here,  when 


152 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


communion  of  Life  and  Work  is  concerned,  still  less 
when  the  bright  faith  in  God’s  goodness  has  been 
mercilessly  disturbed  and  troubled  by  the  world 
crisis,  even  in  those  hearts  that  did  not  find  long  be¬ 
fore  the  ordinary  way  of  life  incompatible  with  such 
optimism.  I  hear  that  at  first  the  war  separated  the 
pious  country-people  in  certain  parts  of  Italy  from 
the  Church  and  threatened  to  destroy  faith:  If  the 
Good  and  Almighty  God  we  have  learned  to  believe 
in  really  existed,  this  could  never  have  happened. 
But  then  the  need  of  the  heart  asserted  its  claim,  for 
man  must  abide  with  God.  He  has  no  choice  so  long 
as  he  wishes  to  remain  a  human  being.  Only  in  the 
presence  of  God  is  life  possible  to  endure. 

When  we  have  to  express  briefly  what  unites  us 
against  the  schism  and  disintegration  of  wTar,  not 
merely  as  believers  and  religious  beings,  but  as  Chris¬ 
tians  in  the  real  sense,  two  expressions  have  chiefly 
been  used.  They  remind  one  of  the  difference  of 
which  Chantepie  de  la  Saussaye  used  to  speak  when 
he  said:  “The  Anglicans  have  a  theology  of  Incarna¬ 
tion.  We  have  a  theology  of  Redemption.  The 
Anglicans  have  learned  from  the  Greek  Fathers  to 
group  religion  round  Incarnation.”  The  difference 
in  the  points  of  view  and  methods  of  expression  that 
this  far-sighted  historian  of  religion  observed  is  char¬ 
acteristic  for  Christendom  as  a  whole  and  can  be  used 
to  some  extent  to  denote  the  two  great  basic  tend¬ 
encies  within  positive  Christianity. 

The  Word  has  been  made  flesh.  Into  our  species 
entered  a  divine  ferment,  akin  to  the  image  of  God 
that  is  latent  and  deformed  in  mankind.  Specula- 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


153 


tions  upon  this  run  the  risk  of  becoming  absorbed  in 
human  and  gnostic  wisdom  instead  of  keeping  to  the 
experience  of  faith  and  divine' intercourse.  But  the 
mystery  of  Incarnation  contains  in  nuce  the  whole 
process  of  redemption,  just  as  surely  as  in  the  wTeak 
embryo  each  separate  human  life  is  already  essen¬ 
tially  determined  beforehand  in  its  main  features  and 
in  its  consequences.  From  the  Incarnation  can  be 
derived  the  whole  of  God’s  continued  creation  and 
work  in  the  world  and  the  whole  of  our  individual 
and  social  task. 

We  have,  however,  without  thinking  of  any  devia¬ 
tion,  preferred,  nay,  let  me  say  we  have  without  any 
choice,  without  any  consciousness  of  being  concerned 
with  a  nuance  or  even  of  a  difference  in  Christian 
views,  unconditionally  by  our  own  Christian  experi¬ 
ence  and  by  the  narrative  of  the  Gospel  and  the  spirit 
and  words  of  Holy  Writ,  been  brought  to  Christ’s 
Cross  and  there  found  what  unites  us,  a  unity  so 
potent  and  essential  that  it  surpasses  all  earthly  dif¬ 
ference.  What  does  the  Cross  tell  us?  The  Cross 
means  suffering — incredible,  shameful,  unmerited  suf¬ 
fering,  the  offence  of  suffering,  but  also  the  mystery 
of  suffering,  for  that  suffering,  that  destruction,  that 
shame  is  in  the  service  of  love  and  reveals  God’s  love 
more  deeply  than  all  talk  of  the  heavenly  Father’s 
goodness  and  providence.  Just  what  is  offensive,  just 
what  threatens  to  trouble  and  disturb  consolation, 
that  is  placed  in  the  service  of  love.  A  love  that  lives 
and  suffers  and  dies,  not  for  its  own  sake,  but  for  the 
sake  of  others,  lets  us  suspect  something  of  the  mys¬ 
tery  that  is  called  God,  God’s  desire  and  powder  to 


154 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


redeem  in  spite  of  all  and  through  all,  God’s  vast 
and  mighty  activity.  The  meaning  of  life  is  taken 
from  God’s  own  being.  Jesus  Christ  has  taught  us 
this  meaning  of  life  with  His  life  and  teaching  and 
suffering.  We  must  realize  it  in  the  united  work  of 
Christ’s  congregation.  This  work  obtains  its  strength 
and  its  unity  from  vital  communion  with  the  crucified 
Christ  and  through  Him  with  God,  Whom  we  rightly 
know  and  can  trust  through  the  Cross  alone. 

Somewhat  in  this  way  perhaps  might  be  indicated 
the  spiritual  communion  that  is  at  the  same  time  a 
common,  superrational,  conquering  Christian  faith 
above  the  things  of  this  world,  and  the  motive  and 
guidance  for  a  united  Life  and  Work  to  which 
Christ’s  congregation  is  now  summoned  more  insist¬ 
ently  than  ever  by  God’s  own  authoritative  voice. 
He  is  our  Peace,  Who  made  both  one,  and  brake  down 
the  middle  wall  of  partition,  having  abolished  in  His 
flesh  the  enmity.  During  these  last  years  have  not 
the  affiliations  of  Christ  been  filled  up  richly  enough 
by  martyred  souls  and  bodies,  in  order  to  abolish 
enmity  and  break  down  divisions  that  prevent  us 
from  becoming  truly  one  in  His  body  which  is  the 
Church ?  (Col.  1:24). 

We  see  how  intimately  the  aching  and  comforting 
mystery  of  the  Cross,  emphasized  to  our  Christendom 
as  never  before,  is  connected  with  the  unity,  which 
already  exists  in  Spirit  between  all  sincere  Christians 
as  well  as  that  which  is  hourly  wanting  in  the  Church 
on  earth. 

Those  three  great  problems — the  enigma  of  suffer¬ 
ing  love  and  expiation,  the  craving  for  the  absolute 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


155 


and  unconditioned  in  religion,  and  the  faith  in  unity 
— are  lessons  taught  by  God  without  difference  of  con¬ 
fessions  and  Church  organizations.  They  prove  that 
creeds  and  venerable  formulas  are  not  sufficient  for 
the  settling  of  our  problem,  but  that  Christian  thought 
is  bound  to  dive  afresh  into  the  depths  of  actual  expe¬ 
riences  in  order  to  find  a  unity  that  formulas  and 
external  divisions  may  conceal. 

A  method  which  makes  too  much  of  formulas  and 
institutions  is  not  able  to  solve  the  problem  of  Chris¬ 
tian  fellowship.  Faith  must  be  conceived  in  a  deeper, 
more  real,  and  more  Evangelic  sense  in  order  to 
create  unity. 


THE  METHOD  OF  LOVE 

I  have  tried  to  indicate  the  method  of  faith  for 
unity  of  belief.  In  the  third  place  I  will  now — after 
the  method  of  absorption  and  the  method  of  faith — - 
show  you  a  still  more  excellent  way:  the  path  of 
love.  This  path  is  called  Christian  co-operation.  This 
method  is  fundamentally  practical,  not  theoretical. 
All  sincere  disciples  can  join  in  it.  Even  those  who 
cherish  the  hope  of  absorbing  all  fellow  Christians 
in  their  own  flock  can  enter  with  us  upon  the  path  of 
love  without  any  prejudice  to  their  principles.  We 
cannot  afford  to  remain  separated  and  in  the  state  of 
unnecessary  impotence,  caused  by  our  separation,1  up 

1  What  Mr.  Lloyd  George  said  to  Dr.  J.  H.  Jowett:  “If  the 
Churches  of  England  were  united  on  anything,  no  government 
could  withstand  their  will” — is  still  more  true  of  a  united 
action  of  all  the  sections  of  the  Church  in  every  country. 


156 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


to  the  time  when  we  shall  be  truly  united  in  faith 
and  Church  organization  through  the  true  doctrine 
of  Evangelic  freedom. 

Listen!  Cries  for  help!  The  whole  party  is  in 
danger  of  being  drowned.  People  come  running  up. 
What  is  to  be  done?  How  get  to  their  rescue  on  the 
thin  ice?  A  chain  must  be  formed,  life-buoys  and 
ropes  must  be  brought.  All  must  work  quietly  and 
systematically;  otherwise  the  help  will  be  in  vain. 
Then  something  unexpected  happens. — “  Excuse  me, 
my  dear  sir,  my  name  is  Smith.  What’s  your  name, 
and  what  opinions  do  you  hold  ?  Where  do  you  come 
from?  For  whom  did  you  vote  at  the  last  election?” 
The  introduction  and  the  discussion  on  the  views  of 
the  one  and  the  other  take  so  long  that  the  help  comes 
too  late.  Is  not  thus  a  double  offence  committed? 
(1)  Who  has  time  for  such  things  when  one’s  neigh¬ 
bour  is  in  danger  of  death?  (2)  Besides,  leave  me 
and  my  faith  alone.  What  business  is  it  of  yours? 
Do  not  interfere  with  things  that  concern  my  heart 
alone.  Or  have  we  not  enough  in  common,  is  there 
not  sufficient  evidence  of  our  mutual  fellowship  in  the 
fact  that  we  are  both  willing  to  help,  nay,  that  we 
are  both  prepared  to  sacrifice  our  lives  to  help? 

Our  generation  is  verily  like  one  drowning.  Many 
seek  nobly  and  courageously  to  save  themselves  and 
others  from  ruin.  Many  give  the  best  assistance  in 
their  power.  The  different  Christian  faiths  and  com¬ 
munities  do  not  always  behave  quite  so  senselessly  as 
described  above.  The  distress  of  the  world  has 
brought  into  closer  contact  those  who  otherwise 
wander  separately,  although  they  all  want  to  follow 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


157 


in  the  Saviour’s  footsteps.  But  for  Christian  co-op¬ 
eration  it  has  often  been  made  a  rule — either  under¬ 
stood  or  clearly  expressed — to  ascertain  uniformity 
of  creed,  before  the  members  of  Christ’s  Church  can 
agree  to  work  whole-heartedly  together  in  His  name. 
Leave  to  each  communion  entire  freedom  to  regulate 
its  own  faith  and  its  own  affairs.  Is  not  our  sincere 
yearning  to  follow  the  Lord  enough?  Is  it  necessary 
to  go  into  the  question  of  our  different  creeds,  views, 
and  customs,  when  the  great  thing  in  common  really 
exists  in  our  hearts;  namely,  obedience  to  the  voice 
of  our  Lord?  Our  own  work  in  His  service  as  well 
as  the  distress  of  our  generation  renders  systematic 
co-operation  imperative.  Otherwise  we  are  in  danger 
of  wasting  noble  strength  and  experiencing  the  bit¬ 
terness  of  unnecessary  failure — unnecessary  because 
the  lack  of  confidence  and  clear,  mutual  understand¬ 
ing,  free  from  vain  confusion  and  unseemly  interfer¬ 
ence,  produces  unnecessary  weakness. 

Organization  is  not  the  Important  Thing 

As  I  shall  have  to  speak  about  organization  in  this 
context,  I  will  make  a  few  introductory  observations 
in  order  to  explain  as  clearly  as  possible  that  organi¬ 
zation  is  by  no  means  the  most  important  thing.  It 
is  commonplace,  but  not  unnecessary,  to  say  that 
there  are  more  important  things  in  Christianity  than 
the  most  excellent  establishments  and  institutions.  If 
too  much  importance  is  attached  to  organization,  we 
run  the  risk  of  being  enticed  into  the  prison  of  statu¬ 
tory  religion,  abandoned  long  ago  by  Jesus,  Paul, 
Luther,  and  others,  but  still  attractive. 


158 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


The  Word  of  God  Means  More  Than  Organization 

The  Word  means  more  than  organization — the 
Word  that  was  made  flesh.  Did  onr  Saviour  found 
a  religion  or  perhaps  even  a  Church?  I  cannot  count 
Him  as  one  of  the  founders  of  religion,  but  many 
consider  Him  one.  They  refer  to  the  twelve  disciples, 
whom  He  chose,  and  whom  He  appointed  His  fellow- 
workers.  Christ’s  words  to  Peter  are  perhaps  inter¬ 
preted  as  the  completion  of  this  supposed  organiza¬ 
tion. 

But  even  if  we  look  upon  the  band  of  disciples  as 
the  first  form  of  the  Church,  we  find,  however,  that 
neither  this  body  as  a  whole,  nor  any  single  one  of 
the  twelve  made  members  of  it  by  the  Saviour,  ever 
meant  nearly  so  much  to  the  future  of  Christianity 
as  did  a  man  outside  the  circle  of  the  twelve — a  man 
who  did  not  belong  to  Christ’s  supposed  organization, 
but  who  had  received  his  mission  and  his  impressions 
of  the  Redeemer  in  a  purely  spiritual  way.  Paul 
laboured  more  abundantly  than  they  all  (I  Cor. 
15:10).  If  we  desire  to  speak  of  a  founder  of  the 
Christian  religion,  our  thoughts  might  go  to  him. 
But  even  with  regard  to  his  importance  to  the  world, 
we  must  bear  in  mind  that  this  was  fundamentally 
due  to  his  personal  and  spiritual  influence,  and  only 
in  the  second,  or  perhaps  only  in  the  tenth  place,  to 
the  organization  he  introduced  or  improved  in  the 
communities. 

As  a  second  example  we  will  take  the  man  who  has 
had  a  deeper  influence  on  the  West  than  any  man 
after  Jesus.  In  distinct  contrast  to  those  who  had 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


159 


separated  from  tlie  Church  in  order  to  form  purer 
religious  communities,  Luther  had,  as  we  have  seen, 
at  the  beginning  of  his  prophetic  career,  no  thought 
of  forming  a  religious  community.  The  necessity 
of  organization  was  forced  upon  him  through  Rome’s 
impotence  to  absorb  his  message.  It  is  true  that 
Luther  has  left  evidence  of  ingenuity  also  as  an  or¬ 
ganizer — a  fact  which  has,  especially  lately,  been 
emphasized;  for  instance,  his  ideas  on  the  duties  of 
a  bishop,  ‘as  expounded  and  put  into  practice  by  him, 
deserve  attention  wherever  in  Evangelic  Christen¬ 
dom  this  office  exists  or  is  about  to  be  founded, 
whether,  like  Luther,  we  call  it  by  the  name  of  visitor, 
or  prefer  other  names,  such  as  president,  superin¬ 
tendent,  or  whatever  other  temporal  titles  we  may 
be  able  to  invent,  or  whether  we  venture  to  use  the 
Biblical  and  old-established  word  bishop.  But,  on 
the  whole,  Luther  had  no  inclination  to  organize  a 
new  religious  community.  His  calling  was  purely 
spiritual.  Peace  within,  perfect  peace,  was  the  object 
of  his  work.  With  outward  establishments  and  in¬ 
stitutions  his  work  had  little  to  do. 

The  Spirit  Means  More  Than  Organization  and 

Diplomacy 

The  Spirit  communicated  to  men  through  the  Word 
of  God  is  more  important  than  organization.  I  may 
be  allowed  to  give  an  example  from  the  actual  world 
crisis.  My  heart  was  filled  with  praise  and  thanks¬ 
giving  to  the  Lord  when  I  read  in  La  Jeune  Bepub- 
lique  about  the  conference  held  in  Paris  under  the 
presidency  of  Marc  Sangnier.  For  a  whole  week 


160 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


there  sat  together  in  friendly  counsel  representatives 
of  different  nations,  among  them  also  Germans,  Aus¬ 
trians,  and  Hungarians.  They  had  come  together, 
not  to  wallow  in  discussions  on  the  responsibility  for 
the  outbreak  of  the  war,  but  to  help  to  kill  hatred 
and  other  germs  dangerous  to  our  civilization.  They 
wranted,  to  quote  Marc  Sangnier’s  own  words,  to  build 
up  peace  on  a  more  solid  foundation  than  a  peace 
treaty  that  “had  proved  a  terrible  disappointment 
to  the  anxiously  waiting  peoples,  because  it  means  in 
reality  no  peace  at  all”;  namely,  on  the  good-will 
among  all  nations.  At  the  public  sitting  that  brought 
the  conference  to  a  close,  Marc  Sangnier  proclaimed 
to  a  consenting  audience  a  principle  which  ought  to 
be  self-evident  to  all  Christians,  and  which  we  tried 
to  impress  by  our  joint  appeal  of  November,  1914: 
that  God  is  more  and  must  be  more  to  us  than  any¬ 
thing  else,  even  more  than  our  own  native  country. 
He  wanted  to  form  a  league  of  nations,  not  with  the 
object  of  securing  the  advantages  of  a  war  victory, 
but  to  secure  peace  in  the  whole  world.  France  must 
not  be  the  bulwark  of  social,  international,  and  capi¬ 
talist  reaction,  but,  faithful  to  her  best  traditions,  she 
must  strive  to  realize  what  is  really  right,  and  to 
serve  the  brotherhood  of  mankind.  “If  we  had  pro¬ 
nounced  such  principles  when  we  were  beaten  in 
1870,  we  should  have  had  nothing  to  glory  of.  If 
now,  in  1918,  we  are  the  conquerors,  it  is  our  glory 
to  proclaim  that  we  are  able  to  sacrifice  everything 
for  the  weal  of  mankind.”  Our  chauvinists  say,  “We 
shall  only  feel  safe  when  there  is  no  rifle  and  no  gun 
in  Germany,”  but  I  say,  “We  shall  only  feel  safe 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


161 


when  there  is  no  more  hate  either  in  France  or  in 
Germany.”  At  this  closing  ceremony  Christians 
from  the  Central  countries  were  also  seated  on  the 
platform.  A  German- Austrian  priest  arose  and  ad¬ 
dressed  the  audience.  This  was  the  first  time  since 
the  war  that  a  German  spoke  in  public  in  Paris. 

Such  things  are  worthy  of  Christendom  and  the 
Church.  We  know  of  similar  voices  from  the  great 
conferences  that  met  during  the  war  and  after  the 
war  in  London  and  in  other  places.  Especially  note¬ 
worthy  are  the  meetings  held  by  the  British  Council 
for  Promoting  an  International  Christian  Confer¬ 
ence,  under  the  presidency  of  Lord  Parmoor,  the  most 
trusted  layman  of  the  Anglican  communion,  and  the 
great  champion  of  peace  in  Christendom  universal, 
who  on  the  occasion  of  the  eleventh  Church  Assembly 
in  Stockholm  delivered  his  magnificent  lecture  on  the 
duties  of  the  Church  in  the  present  world  crisis.  At 
a  similar  meeting  the  Dean  of  St.  Paul’s  spoke  many 
a  word,  sharp  and  to  the  point.  Beside  such  Angli¬ 
cans,  Quakers  like  Miss  Ellis  and  Dr.  Hodgkin,  and 
Nonconformists,  the  genuine  Christian  spirit  of  fel¬ 
lowship  in  spite  of  war  was  clearly  and  courageously 
upheld  by  a  noble  number  of  clergy  and  laymen.  We 
think  of  the  powerful  protest  lodged  against  the  con¬ 
tinuance  of  the  blockade  by  Bishop  Gore,  the  spiritual 
leader  of  the  High  Church  Party  in  England,  and 
of  other  evidence  of  the  Evangelic  conscience.  The 
champions  of  such  principles  were  bitterly  attacked 
in  their  own  countries,  and  perhaps  denounced  as 
unpatriotic,  nay,  traitors.  But  in  the  end,  notwith¬ 
standing  their  sharp  criticism  of  national  politics, 


162 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


they  have,  by  raising  their  voices,  proved  an  honour 
to  their  native  lands. 

Now  we  may  add  to  their  number  Marc  Sangnier. 
But  his  enterprise  did  not  originate  in,  nor  was  it  by 
any  means  called  forth  by,  the  organization  known  to 
the  world  and  to  the  history  of  religion  as  the  most 
admired  one;  namely,  the  hierarchy  of  Rome  with 
the  Pope  as  the  supreme  head  of  the  Roman  Catholics 
in  all  countries.  No,  the  dawn  of  international  peace 
in  Paris  had  its  origin  in  Marc  Sangnier ’s  Christian 
enthusiasm  and  the  spirit  of  his  friends  and  those 
present  at  the  conference.  Sangnier  emphasized  that 
he  himself  was  as  little  of  a  clericalist  as  possible, 
and  that  he  was  equally  opposed  by  Roman  and  by 
revolutionary  clericalists.  A  noble  British  Protes¬ 
tant,  the  Rev.  Oliver  Dryer,  secretary  of  the  Fel¬ 
lowship  of  Reconciliation,  said  at  the  conference, 
“We  have  conquered  all  sorts  of  things,  but,  best  of 
all,  ourselves.”  Dryer  added  that  during  the  con¬ 
ference  Catholic  priests  had  mingled  like  brothers 
with  adherents  of  other  faiths. 

Pastor  Wilfred  Monod  of  l’Oratoire  du  Louvre 
sent  the  following  letter:  “Circumstances  have  pre¬ 
vented  me  from  taking  part  in  the  first  international 
democratic  congress,  but  I  am  anxious  to  assure  you 
of  my  deep  and  considered  sympathy  with  your 
initiative.  In  your  opening  address  you  defined  per¬ 
fectly  the  problem  which  is  imposed  on  men  of  good¬ 
will:  'To  seek  the  moral  conditions  for  the  disarma¬ 
ment  of  hatred  and  the  reconciliation  of  the  nations.’ 
The  problem  is  ultimately  of  a  psychological  char¬ 
acter — a  statement  that  is  both  troubling  and  encour- 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


163 


aging:  troubling,  because  the  soul  of  the  nations  ap¬ 
pears  to  be  unseizable,  it  remaining  a  target  that  de¬ 
fies  the  concrete  calculations  of  ballistics,  and  of  the 
policy  called  realistic ;  encouraging,  because,  in  spite 
of  all,  the  soul  of  the  nations  is  what  is  most  true, 
most  real,  most  living — an  incomparable  point  dfappui 
for  every  lever  applied  to  mankind. 

‘ ‘Where  indeed  are  we  to  assign  the  limit  to  the 
moral  capacities  of  humanity?  Where  are  the  bound¬ 
aries  assigned  to  its  spiritual  progress,  to  its  indefi¬ 
nite  evolution  towards  higher  forms  of  existence?  It 
is  endowed  with  an  admirable  and  redoubtable  power 
of  free  decision  which  undoubtedly  permits  retire¬ 
ment  but  also  advancement ;  descent  but  also  ascent. 
Far  from  its  nature’s  being  immutable  and  fixed  in 
a  fatal  manner,  mankind  is  prepared  to  rectify  even 
its  secular  orientation,  to  acquire  sentiments  and 
ideas,  even  to  enrich  itself  with  new  attributes. 

“To  deny  that  humanity  is  able  and  ought  to  tri¬ 
umph  over  its  bestial  inheritance,  the  atavistic  rule 
of  violence,  and  suppress  the  legal  recourse  to  war, 
that  is  to  organized  homicide,  in  order  to  settle  the 
conflicts  of  interests  between  nations,  that  is  to  deny 
humanity  itself,  to  blaspheme  the  Spirit,  to  promul¬ 
gate  the  dictatorship  of  materialism. 

“Let  us  then  venture  to  hope,  to  affirm,  to  act. 
Moratoriums  in  the  domain  of  moral  redemption  are 
useless,  absurd,  and  culpable.  To  see  good  without 
wishing  for  good  is  to  betray  the  universe  and  deny 
the  Eternal. 

“You  do  not  belong  to  these  deserters.  You  inspire, 
you  animate,  you  carry  us  away.  I  feel  impelled  to 


164 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


address  to  yon,  publicly,  the  expression  of  my  grati¬ 
tude  as  a  Frenchman  and  a  Christian. 

Wilfred  Monod, 

Pastor  of  FOratoire  du  Louvre, 
Professor  in  la  Faculte  de  Theo- 
logie  Protestante. 

A  considerable  number  of  Evangelic  Christians  from 
Holland,  Germany,  Scandinavia,  and  other  countries 
took  part  in  the  conference,  but  also  men  be¬ 
longing  to  no  Christian  creed.  The  French  pacifists, 
who  do  not  represent  any  ecclesiastical  or  Chris¬ 
tian  party,  played  rather  an  important  part  at  the 
great  final  sitting.  So  we  see  that  the  spirit  means 
more  than  organization. 

Testimonies  of  Christian  Solidarity  in  Eoman  and  in 

Evangelic  Christendom 

Marc  Sangnier’s  Christian  peace  conference,  which 
was,  no  doubt,  brought  about  under  great  difficulties, 
was  doubly  gratifying  to  those  who  had  felt  bitterly 
disappointed  with  Rome.  The  Pope  proclaimed  excel¬ 
lent  intentions,  and  the  Vatican  made  earnest  en¬ 
deavours  to  bring  about  peace.  Yet  Rome  failed 
during  and  after  the  war  to  give  evidence  of  her 
adherence  to  the  principle  of  Christian  solidarity 
even  in  times  of  war.  We  Evangelic  Christians, 
anxiously  guarding  our  inherited  spiritual  freedom, 
in  which  there  is,  perhaps,  an  element  of  too  sensitive 
Germanic  individualism,  we  Evangelic  Christians, 
who  are  without  a  common  spokesman  and  bitterly 
felt  the  loss  of  such  an  ecumenical  council  during  and 
after  the  war,  we  were  justified  in  looking  towards 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


165 


our  Roman  brethren,  expecting  courageous  testi¬ 
monies  of  Christian  solidarity,  notwithstanding  the 
temptations  of  the  World  War.  Their  common  duty 
of  obedience  to  the  same  absolute  ecclesiastical  su¬ 
premacy  gave  us  the  hope  of  such  testimonies  from 
them.  I  was  full  of  expectation,  therefore,  when  I 
read  Baupin’s  resume  on  ‘'Roman  Catholics  and  In¬ 
ternational  Relations”  in  the  March  issue,  1921,  of 
The  Constructive  Quarterly,  after  I  had  been  trying, 
during  and  after  the  war,  to  collect  all  information 
bearing  on  this  subject.  In  so  doing  I  have  been 
moved  by  a  strong  feeling  of  spiritual  fellowship 
with  all,  I  say  all,  who  worship  Christ's  name.  But 
strengthened  as  it  was  by  Evangelic  and  other 
forces,  Marc  Sangnier’s  conference  seems  to  have 
been,  as  far  as  we  know,  the  first  really  supernational 
one  on  the  Roman  side.  I  should  be  glad  if,  in  spite 
of  the  war,  there  were  testimonies  of  Christian 
solidarity  within  the  Roman  Church  that  had  escaped 
my  notice. 

We  all  know  that  the  analogous  undertakings  in  the 
non-Roman  part  of  the  Church,  the  World  Alliance 
for  Promoting  International  Friendship  Through  the 
Churches,  after  preparations  during  several  years, 
really  held  its  constitutive  meeting  at  Constance  in 
the  last  days  of  July  and  the  first  days  of  August, 
1914. 

Toward  the  end  of  the  war  Catholics  belonging  to 
Entente  countries,  “prompted  by  motives  of  prudence 
and  national  loyalty,”  encouraged  no  international 
meetings.  Those  of  the  Central  empires,  at  the  sug¬ 
gestion  of  Herr  Erzberger,  and  with  the  co-operation 


166 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


of  their  friends  in  German  Switzerland,  founded  an 
International  Catholic  Union  with  its  headquarters 
at  Zurich  and  held  its  sessions  there.  This  union  con¬ 
sisted  entirely  of  Germanophilist  Catholics,  recruited 
almost  entirely  from  parliamentary  and  political  cir¬ 
cles.  Since  it  proclaimed  that  its  aim  was  to  devote 
itself  exclusively  to  the  defence  of  religious  causes, 
it  obtained  the  approbation  of  the  Holy  See  in  March, 
1917.  During  the  war  it  held  two  assemblies,  one  in 
March,  1917,  the  other  in  August,  1918. 

Those  international  Catholic  gatherings  thus  simply 
consisted  in  meetings  between  Roman  Catholics  from 
Central  Europe  with  their  friends  in  neutral  coun¬ 
tries.  There  are  records  of  a  considerable  number  of 
such  gatherings  also  after  the  war.  Another  group 
of  Roman  Catholics  organized  meetings  pretending 
to  be  international,  but  restricted  by  the  political 
situation  to  similar  poor  limits.  About  the  same  time 
some  Catholics  favouring  the  cause  of  the  Entente  or 
belonging  to  Entente  nations  began  to  hold  friendly 
meetings  of  a  private  character  at  Fribourg,  in  the 
home  of  Baron  de  Montenach,  one  of  their  number. 
The  author  of  the  article  mentioned,  Mr.  Baupin,  who 
is  himself  general  secretary  of  the  Comite  des  Amities 
Catholiques  Fr&ngaises  d  Vetr anger,  gives  further 
proofs  of  what  should  testify  an  international  Catholic 
solidarity.  On  September  13,  1920,  pilgrims  from 
Belgium,  Spain,  Luxembourg  and  Portugal,  with  an 
archbishop  from  Equador,  took  part  in  a  “very  im¬ 
pressive  ceremony  at  Lourdes.” 

A  congress  held  at  The  Hague,  June  15-19,  1920, 
formed  the  International  Confederation  of  the  Chris- 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


167 


tian  Syndicates.  The  year  before,  1919,  an  interna¬ 
tional  syndical  conference  was  held  at  Paris  with 
delegates  of  eight  countries,  Belgium,  Spain,  Italy, 
Lithuania,  Latvia,  Holland,  Poland,  and  Switzerland. 
But  at  Rotterdam,  on  February  20,  1920,  one  German 
delegate  conferred  with  Dutch,  Belgian  and  French 
Christian  syndicates.  At  the  conference  just  men¬ 
tioned  at  The  Hague  in  June,  1920,  representing  ten 
national  syndical  groups,  it  is  not  evident  whether 
any  member  was  present  from  the  Central  powers. 
We  are  told  that  a  Dutch  delegate  read  the  declara¬ 
tion  of  regret  of  the  German  syndicates.  Anyhow, 
it  may  be  mentioned  that  Evangelic  Christians  also 
belong  to  those  syndicates. 

Some  months  later  “Catholics  of  good-will  from 
France,  Switzerland,  and  Italy  arranged  a  new  meet¬ 
ing  in  the  presence  of  members  also  from  Chili, 
Poland,  and  Belgium,  forming  together  the  Catholic 
Union  for  International  Studies  that  has  been  ap¬ 
proved  by  “important  personages  from  Spain,  Hol¬ 
land,  Canada,  and  Czecho-Slovakia,  who  were  not 
present  at  the  inauguration.  Indeed  still  to-day  that 
Catholic  Union  consists  of  those  Catholics  only,  “who 
belong  to  nationalities  which  have  already  been  ad¬ 
mitted  to  the  League  of  Nations.” 

A  congress  composed  of  representatives  of  agricul¬ 
tural  syndicates  gathered  two  days  later  also  at  Paris. 
Amongst  its  thirteen  different  nationalities  one  seeks 
in  vain  for  the  Catholics  of  Central  Europe. 

Having  studied  the  publications  on  this  matter  in 
German  and  French  and  having  read  the  quoted 
article  carefully  twice,  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  no 


168 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


single,  truly  supernational  Roman  Catholic  gather¬ 
ing  has  convened  since  the  war.  If  we  do  not  count 
the  single  German  pacifist  present  at  Rotterdam, 
February  20,  1920,  Marc  Sangnier’s  meeting  seems 
then  to  be  the  first  of  its  kind.  So  little  importance 
has  organization.  The  most  powerful,  the  most  abso¬ 
lute  ecclesiastical  constitution  existing,  has  not  been 
able  to  bring  about  what  Evangelic  Christianity, 
known,  and  badly  known,  for  the  divisions  that  were 
always  observed  by  its  adversaries,  and  regretted  by 
its  members,  had  already  carried  out  long  before. 
Not  some  solitary  pacifist,  but  representative  Church¬ 
men  and  laymen  in  responsible  positions  from  Ger¬ 
many,  England,  and  neutral  countries  met  in  con¬ 
ference  at  Berne  for  three  days  in  the  autumn  of 
1915. 

Circumstances  beyond  our  control  unfortunately 
prevented  the  conference  between  eminent,  highly 
trusted  servants  of  the  Church  from  both  camps  that 
was  planned  as  early  as  1917.  As  our  friends  from 
the  West  were  refused  passports,  we  have  with  the 
deepest  regret — rather  than  spoil  the  desired  ecu¬ 
menical  character  of  the  gathering — desisted  from  the 
presence  of  those  spiritual  fathers  and  brethren  who 
were  already  about  to  embark  on  their  journey  from 
Germany  and  Hungary.  But  at  last,  between  the  1st 
and  the  3rd  of  October,  1919,  at  Oud  Wassenaer  in 
Holland,  it  came  about.  This  ardently  desired  con¬ 
ference  was  between  Evangelic  laymen  in  respon¬ 
sible  positions  and  bishops  and  other  leading  Church 
servants  from  America,  Germany,  England,  Italy, 
Hungary,  France,  Belgium,  Latvia,  Finland,  and  neu- 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


169 


tral  countries.  In  order  to  refute  incorrect  state¬ 
ments,  it  should  be  emphasized  here  that  we  did  not 
meet  there  as  accusers  and  accused  or  as  judges,  nor 
were  any  special  conditions  made  for  the  participa¬ 
tion  of  any  party  in  the  conference.  But  collective 
and  individual  crimes  and  omissions  were  admitted 
on  both  sides  with  Christian  courage.  We  were  ail 
deeply  conscious  of  our  responsibility  and  of  our  need 
to  obtain  forgiveness  from  God  and  our  fellow 
creatures. 

In  August  of  the  following  year,  1920,  the  Uni¬ 
versal  Conference  of  the  Church  of  Christ  on  Life 
and  Work  was  founded  in  Geneva  by  representative 
Christian  personalities  from  the  United  States  of 
America,  Austria,  Belgium,  Denmark,  France,  Ger¬ 
many,  Great  Britain,  Hungary,  Italy,  Jugo-Slavia,  the 
Netherlands,  Norway,  Spain,  Sweden,  and  Switzer¬ 
land,  in  the  presence  of  eminent  fraternal  visitors 
from  Orthodox  Christendom.  During  the  last  thirty 
years  I  have  been  present  at  many  international  meet¬ 
ings  and  I  can  recall  some  that  were  more  soul¬ 
stirring,  more  solemn  and  beautiful  than  this  gather¬ 
ing  of  earnest  Christian  workers  from  the  Old  World 
and  the  New.  But  I  was  never  present  at  any  inter¬ 
national  conference  that  meant  spiritual  action  so 
much  as  this  one. 

Difficulties  were  not  palliated,  but  brought  to  light 
with  moving,  sometimes  somewhat  merciless,  sin¬ 
cerity.  What  was  the  result?  At  no  previous  con¬ 
ference  did  I  experience  so  tremendous  a  spiritual 
effort  as  on  this  occasion.  While  praying  and  watch¬ 
ing  were  not  our  hearts  burning  within  us?  Did  not 


170 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


the  power  of  the  divine  love  break  through  all  the 
obstacles  raised  by  bitter  differences,  feelings  wounded 
to  the  quick,  just  claims,  and  well-meant  palliation 
or  postponement?  We  neutrals  easily  underrate  the 
experiences  and  present  feelings  of  our  brethren  in 
the  belligerent  countries.  During  the  war,  in  1916, 
I  wrote  a  warning  against  “Our  Spiritual  Peril  as 
Neutrals,”1  being  Pharisaism — fine  or  coarse.  Igno¬ 
rance  and  secret  self-righteousness  lead  us  into  the 
temptation  of  taking  too  light  a  view  of  their  cause. 
Our  conference  did  not  pass  off  in  loving  harmony, 
yet  in  the  spirit  of  victory,  and  we  thank  God  that 
He  was  greater  than  our  hearts. 

Immediately  after  this  conference  the  International 
Commission  on  the  World  Conference  on  Faith  and 
Order  held  its  remarkable  theological  discussions  in 
Geneva,  during  which  no  partiality,  no  word,  no  look, 
betrayed  the  dissension  of  the  war,  and  where  the 
subject  of  Faith  and  Order  claimed  the  whole  atten¬ 
tion  and  different  theories  brought  about  groupings 
quite  independent  of  the  political  situation.  Before 
this  the  Young  Men’s  Christian  Associations  had  held 
their  splendid  international  meeting  at  Beatenberg, 
and  Evangelic  Christians  had  congregated  for  a 
general  mission  conference,  at  which  the  cause  of 
Christ  sincerely  united  those  whom  the  cause  of  their 
native  countries  had  separated  from  each  other.  All 
Evangelic  hearts  rejoiced  to  read  how  one  year 
later,  i.e.,  1921,  at  the  Mission  Conference  at  Lake 
Mohonk,  French  and  English  voices  were  earnestly 

1  The  Constructive  Quarterly ,  New  York,  March,  1917. 


WAYS  TO  UNITY  171 

raised  on  behalf  of  the  cause  of  the  German  Evan¬ 
gelic  missions. 

What  further  need  have  we  of  testimonies?  I  have 
not  mentioned  these  facts  in  order  to  reflect  credit  on 
ourselves  or  anybody  else.  No,  we  stand  guilty  before 
the  Lord.  And  we  see  with  shame  that  in  our  Chris¬ 
tianity  the  love  of  Christ  and  the  power  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  have  come  second  to  other  influences,  which 
are  not  of  God.  But  so  much  is  evident,  that  where 
the  Spirit  is  lacking,  organization  is  fundamentally 
of  little  importance.  Perhaps  discord  and  hate  re¬ 
veal  their  abomination  in  a  yet  more  hideous  shape 
under  the  squalid  cloak  of  a  common  ecclesiastical 
organization.  Where  the  Spirit  is,  however,  there  can 
confidence  and  spiritual  communion  be  made  mani¬ 
fest,  also  in  outward  matters,  even  though  we  have 
no  common  institution. 

Perhaps  we  also  get  a  presentiment  that  Evan¬ 
gelic  Christendom  with  all  its  divisions  has  a  higher 
degree  of  unity  than  outward  appearance  and  public 
opinion  give  us  to  understand,  and  we  dare  to  believe 
ourselves.  We  see  at  least  that  the  most  important 
thing  is  not  to  create  organization  and  outward 
forms,  but  to  have  all  over  the  world  praying,  ardent 
souls,  who  bind  together  our  torn  and  struggling 
humanity  with  invisible  but  effective  chains  of  love. 

Spiritual  Unity 

Neither  big  forms  nor  big  words  can  repair  the  in¬ 
juries  of  our  epoch.  Only  a  truly  Christian  spirit 
and  a  truly  Christian  life  can  do  this. 


172 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


Earnest  men  are  tired  of  the  profuse  rolling  words 
and  the  torrent  of  well-meant,  big  proposals.  They 
become  “fanatics  of  the  small  work”  (“ Fwnatiker 
der  Kleinar’beit”) ,  as  Dr.  Siegmund-Sehultze  con¬ 
fesses  of  himself.  “Die  Vielzuvielen,  the  too  many, 
come  with  great  systems  and  speeches  and  try  their 
quack  remedies  on  the  whole  organism,  hut  only  a  few 
decide  to  perform  the  operation  at  the  dangerous 
spot.”  Without  small  cells  that  are  living  and  strong, 
no  organism  can  come  into  being  and  subsist. 

It  is  a  hard  task.  “The  radical  evil  was  always 
just  as  certain  to  us  as  the  belief  that  man  is  well 
conditioned.”  But  now,  to  believe  in  the  good  that 
is  impressed  in  mankind;  to  believe  in  the  Good  One 
WTho  is  incarnated  in  humanity;  to  incarnate  this 
Good  One  and  this  good,  daily,  actually,  in  other 
words,  a  true  Incarnation  in  the  t3rpe  of  the  Son  of 
Man,  i.e.,  of  man  as  he  is  to  be,  that  is  our  purpose. 
Where  this  is  done  earnestly  the  barriers  collapse 
between  men,  between  classes,  nay,  between  nations. 
This  alone  is  the  path  to  reconciliation,  to  reconstruc¬ 
tion.  Only  by  action  that  is  truly  in  earnest  about 
the  example  of  Christ  can  the  dismemberment  of 
to-day  be  healed,  obviously  not  by  effeminate  talk 
about  peace,  but  in  the  struggle  for  peace.  No  day 
without  a  sword.  No  hour  in  which  we  do  not  assert 
our  inexorableness  against  the  evil  that  is  radically 
inherent  in  us.  Abhor  the  evil,  hold  fast  to  the  good ! 

So  whoever  can  no  longer  follow  this  path  with  us, 
whoever  has  lost  faith  in  communion,  steals  from  our 
union.  We  have  no  use  for  half-measure  people.  I 
wish  to  put  it  quite  clearly.  Not  only  our  fellow 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


173 


workers  but  even  tlie  friends  of  onr  cause  are  con¬ 
sidered  by  us  as  those  who  are  willing  to  live  our 
faith.  He  who  does  not  realize  God  does  not  believe 
in  Him.  People  who  no  longer  believe  in  a  com¬ 
munion  of  those  who  wish  for  God,  do  not  realize  it. 
Friends  who  do  not  strain  every  nerve  to  establish 
true  communion  are  a  burden  to  us.  Our  own  reso¬ 
lution  must  suffer  if  such  companions  complain  of 
their  breathlessness  and  alarm  at  each  new  ascent  or 
each  new  danger.  Moreover  one  does  not  ascend  with 
a  heavy  weight  of  luggage.  We  have  no  use  for  capi¬ 
talists  of  the  old  stamp  in  our  midst.  He  who  can¬ 
not  rid  himself  of  the  superfluous  pounds  of  his  lug¬ 
gage  at  each  ascent  that  is  required  of  him  on  his 
highroad,  is  of  no  use  for  our  path.  How  difficult  it 
is  for  a  rich  man  to  ascend! 

To  put  it  practically,  I  say  quite  distinctly  that  we 
will  not  have  any  one  in  our  midst  who  is  not  pre¬ 
pared  to  sacrifice.  It  is  painful  to  me  when  people, 
who  follow  in  the  footsteps  of  the  poor  One  Who  went 
through  the  houses  of  the  rich  without  hiding  the 
truth,  ask  those  rich  people  for  alms  for  the  service 
of  Him  who  cried  woe  upon  such  rich  people.  Also 
our  proteges  often  have  no  place  to  stay  overnight, 
and  our  fellow  workers  cannot  help — but  it  is  not 
proper  for  us,  on  account  of  this,  to  make  even  a  single 
concession,  a  concession  to  the  power  and  wealth  of 
this  world.  When,  with  Saint  Francis  of  Assisi,  we 
wish  to  be  poor  servants  of  a  poor  Master,  we  are 
still  servants  of  the  greatest  Master  and  must  know 
how  to  preserve  His  dignity.  Our  exhortation  to  help 
is  not,  “May  it  please  your  gracious  lordship.”  But 


174 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


it  is,  “Bow  yourselves  in  order  to  become  worthy  of 
helping.  Bow  yourselves  as  we  do !  Bow  to  the  King 
and  give  yourselves  willingly  in  His  service.  You 
cannot  serve  God  and  mammon.  Either — or!  Who 
is  prepared  to  give  his  life?  .  .  .  Yes,  do  not  be 
jealous  any  longer  of  those  who  have  many  treasures, 
but  of  those  who  are  allowed  to  stake  their  lives.  ” 

Such  a  rule  of  life,  nay,  such  lives  humble  us  and 
exalt  our  Redeemer.  They  are  also  found  in  France, 
England,  and  in  other  parts  of  Christendom.  Who 
does  not  observe  how  meaningless  it  is  to  set  up  sym¬ 
bols  and  ecclesiastical  constitutions  as  boundaries  for 
a  Christlike  life?  Beneath  the  barriers  of  confessions 
such  souls  find  one  another  in  the  mystery  of  suffer¬ 
ing  and  the  Cross.  Above  the  barriers  of  confessions 
they  are  raised  by  the  surging  exaltation  of  the  Spirit. 

Well-meaning  superficiality  veils  the  differences. 
Fundamental  union  with  Christ  discovers  unity  be-  V 
hind  the  differences.  The  more  Christian  a  human 
being  is,  the  more  deeply  he  feels,  independently  of 
his  confession,  his  affinity  with  others  that  take  Chris¬ 
tianity  seriously.1 

If  our  united  Life  and  Work  is  to  come  to  any¬ 
thing  our  strength  is  not  to  be  sought  in  any  organi¬ 
zation  but  in  God  Himself  and  thus  in  the  human 
beings  and  the  groups  that  live  in  Him.  A  truly 

1  God  has  children  also  outside  of  Christendom,  who  live  in 
Him  and  for  Him.  God’s  self-revelation  is  a  superabundant 
richness,  unmeritedly  bestowed  upon  us.  A  Christian  who 
does  not  realize  Christ  in  heart  and  life  is  like  a  rich  man 
who  uses  his  wealth  badly.  A  non-Christian  who  lives  up  to 
the  truth  accessible  to  him  is  like  a  poor  man  who  bears  his 
scantity  with  dignity. 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


175 


Christian  life  means  more  than  any  organization  or 
tradition,  because  it  shows  an  absolute  spiritual  au¬ 
thority.  And  what  our  world  is  fatally  lacking  in  is 
authority. 

Under  which  authority  do  we  live?  Answer:  Under 
the  authority  of  the  State,  or  States.  Their  authority 
is  poorly  provided  for.  What  is  their  supreme  law? 
Shall  we  answer:  The  law  of  the  fist?  The  crying 
need  of  an  authority  that  extends  beyond  the  States 
and  groups  them  in  a  greater  whole  has  produced 
the  League  of  Nations. 

We  need  not  insist  here  upon  its  failure,  consisting 
in  its  weakness  and  in  its  perversion  to  be  a  disguised 
form  for  maintaining  the  interests  of  some  nations 
against  others,  but  the  thing  itself  cannot  die.  But 
even  if  the  League  of  Nations  could  embrace  America, 
Germany,  and  Russia  and  become  something  of  what 
it  was  intended  to  be,  we  feel  it  is  not  ready.  At  best 
it  is  a  body  crying  out  for  a  soul,  and  only  Chris¬ 
tianity  can  supply  that  lack.  If  a  supernational 
commonwealth  remains  without  a  soul  it  wTill  be  a 
corpse.  If  it  acquires  a  soul  that  is  not  truly  Chris¬ 
tian,  it  can  easily  become  a  devil. 

Because  an  outward  authority — which  is,  alas,  ter¬ 
ribly  lacking  in  our  epoch,  as  Professor  Perrero  has 
luminously  shown — requires  a  spiritual  authority 
that,  according  to  the  Apostle  (II.  Cor.  4:2),  ap¬ 
peals  to  men’s  hearts  and  has  an  ally  in  each  soul  in 
the  fight  against  private  and  collective  selfishness. 
An  outward  authority  is  simply  organized  violence,  if 
it  does  not  repose  on  a  spiritual  authority  recognized 
by  the  best  members  of  classes  and  nations. 


176 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


From  this  a  double  conclusion  can  be  drawn.  We 
need  a  spiritual  authority.  The  supernational  lawful 
order,  like  law  in  general,  must  rest  on  a  spiritual 
authority.  It  is  not  far  off.  We  read  about  it  in 
Deut.  30:12-14.  “It  is  not  in  heaven,  that  thou 
shouldest  say,  Who  shall  go  up  for  us  to  heaven  and 
bring  it  unto  us,  and  make  us  to  hear  it,  that  we  may 
do  it?  Neither  is  it  beyond  the  sea,  that  thou 
shouldest  say:  Who  shall  go  over  the  sea  for  us,  and 
bring  it  unto  us,  and  make  us  to  hear  it,  that  we  may 
do  it?  But  the  word  is  very  nigh  unto  thee,  in  thy 
mouth,  and  in  thy  heart,  that  thou  mayest.  do  it.” 

Now  God  is  nearer  than  then,  for  the  Word  was 
made  flesh  and  dwelt  among  us  (John  1:14).  The 
only  spiritual  authority  that  can  save  our  civilization 
from  dissolution  and  self-destruction  is  Christ  and 
His  Gospel.  Is  the  Church  really  able  to  give  the 
disintegrating  world  a  spiritual  orientation  and  a 
spiritual  authority?  One  may  really  doubt  and  ask, 
not  doubt  about  Christ’s  authority  and  ask  about 
God’s  dominion,  but  of  course  ask  whether  the  Church 
whole-heartedly  serves  God’s  dominion.  So  much  is 
obvious,  that  no  form  nor  organization  can  for  the 
Church  in  its  parts  and  as  a  whole  replace  the  one 
thing  needful ;  namely,  that  above  all  she  herself  sub¬ 
mits  to  Christ’s  spiritual  authority  and  thus  unitedly 
by  her  life  and  teaching  testifies  to  a  common  submis¬ 
sion  to  the  power  of  the  Spirit. 

Necessity  of  a  New  Creed 

Love  needs  wisdom.  Effort  needs  clear  insight  and 
direction.  Otherwise  much  noble  endeavour,  much 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


177 


precious  sacrifice  is  wasted.  The  practical  task  of  the 
Church  must  be  guided  by  elaborate  and  exact  theory 
also  for  a  second  reason.  If  there  is  difference  of 
opinion — if,  for  instance,  one  preacher  says  that 
Christ  was  a  socialist  and  His  true  followers  must 
abolish  private  property,  if  another  says  that  private 
property  is  necessary  for  the  independence  and  full 
development  of  character,  and  if  from  the  pulpit  in 
the  neighbouring'  Church  a  great  emphasis  tries  to 
prove  that  religion  and  the  Church  must  be  indif¬ 
ferent  to  such  matters  because  the  social  and  economic 
construction  of  society  has  nothing  whatever  to  do 
with  the  salvation  of  the  individual  soul,  then  the 
laziness  and  egoism  of  the  old  Adam  is  at  last  com¬ 
forted  by  the  thought  that  in  such  discrepancies  of 
doctrine  the  wisest  way  may  be  not  to  do  anything  at 
all.  Therefore  we  urgently  need  clear  doctrine  in 
these  points. 

The  simplest  thing  is  the  most  difficult.  Brother¬ 
hood  of  men,  how  evident !  The  great  commandment 
of  love  even  of  enemies,  of  Samaritans,  of  those  be¬ 
longing  to  another  nation,  or  to  a  despised  race,  how 
beautiful!  But  if  we  look  round,  it  seems  doubtful 
whether  such  a  doctrine  has  really  been  issued  and 
recognized  in  our  civilization.  Ought  not  the  brother¬ 
hood  of  men  to  be  preached  and  brought  about  by 
the  Church?  Nationalistic  prejudices  are  to  be  com¬ 
bated  as  earnestly  as  any  other  heresy.  Does  not  the 
extension  of  lawful  order  to  international  relations 
and  the  organization  of  a  supernational  common¬ 
wealth  concern  the  Church?  Is  it  not  implied  in  the 
very  principles  of  Christianity?  The  Christian  ideal 


178 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


of  peace  against  war  must  belong  to  the  elementary 
teaching  in  Church  and  school  as  well  as  other  essen¬ 
tial  parts  of  our  faith. 

Here  another  problem  emerges;  namely,  the  con¬ 
ception  of  law  and  society.  Some  Christians  think 
that  the  shaping  of  society  and  State  by  law  as  the 
only  guarantee  of  personal  freedom  and  security  is  a 
hard  necessity  caused  by  sin,  but  unnecessary  in  a 
truly  Christian  humanity.  Others  derive  from  the 
Bible  the  idea  that  society  as  a  collective  personality 
belongs  to  God’s  Providence  and  has  a  positive  value 
in  itself.  Evidently  the  Church  ought  to  have  a  con¬ 
scious,  common,  and  directive  doctrine  on  such  a 
fundamental  subject. 

In  society  there  is  a  division  that  is  more  momen¬ 
tous  even  than  the  mutual  opposition  of  nations.  It 
runs  through  every  nation  and  country  and  threatens 
our  whole  civilization.  It  is  due  to  the  economic  and 
social  situation.  In  the  Gospel  our  Saviour  says  much 
about  mammon.  Ought  not  the  Christian  Church  as 
such  to  have  a  clear  and  powerful  programme  in  con¬ 
nection  with  the  reconstruction  of  society?  We  have 
spoken  earlier  of  another  problem,  which  is,  as  well 
as  these  already  mentioned,  not  confined  to  any  com¬ 
munion,  or  to  any  nation,  but  urgent,  in  all  civilized 
nations  and  therefore  to  be  treated  by  the  Church  in 
corpore. 

How  shall  we  serve  our  brethren  in  the  best  way? 
Owing  to  the  influence  of  Christian  ideas,  especially 
to  the  Reformation,  modern  society  feels  its  respon¬ 
sibility  toward  old  age,  the  sick,  the  poor,  the  desti¬ 
tute,  childhood,  the  dangers  of  adolescence.  It  is  evi- 


WAYS  TO  UNITY 


179 


dently  absurd  and  unchristian  if  the  Church  con¬ 
siders  itself  as  a  competitor  in  charity.  It  is  equally 
absurd  if  it  thinks  that  the  lay  community  has  taken 
over  all  responsibility  in  works  of  help  and  charity. 
But  a  clear  theory  is  needed  as  to  the  relation  of 
Christian  service  ( diaconia )  to  the  activity  of  the 
State  and  of  other  philanthropic  undertakings.  A 
possible  distribution  might  be  that  society  is  respon¬ 
sible  for  the  necessary  means  and  institutions  for  old 
age,  the  sick,  the  indigent,  etc.,  but  that  only  the 
Church  is  able  to  furnish  men  and  women  who  con¬ 
sider  such  a  service  as  a  sacred  privilege  and  are 
therefore  able  to  make  the  best  of  it.  In  any  case  a 
clear  theory  is  needed  for  the  action  of  the  Church 
and  of  Christian  endeavour  in  that  domain. 

What  we  need  is  a  new  confession  of  faith.  I  do 
not  mean  any  alteration  in  the  old  creeds  of  the 
Church,  but  a  clear  expression  of  the  teaching  of 
Christ  and  our  Christian  duty  with  regard  to  the 
brotherhood  of  nations,  to  the  fundamental  moral 
laws  for  the  shaping  of  society,  and  to  the  activity 
of  Christian  love  and  charity.  Just  as  in  the  old 
Church  the  enunciation  of  dogmas  was  preceded  by 
eager  discussion  and  profound  investigation,  so  in  our 
time  too  the  enunciation  of  the  new  dogmas  that  we 
need  to  urge  us  on  and  guide  us,  is  being  prepared 
by  the  investigations  and  reflections  of  individual 
Christians  and  the  joint  efforts  of  larger  and  smaller 
groups.  And  just  as  certain  parts  of  the  creeds  of 
old  are  paradoxical  expressions  of  ideas  that  Chris¬ 
tianity  must  advocate,  but  human  thought  cannot 
penetrate  and  systematize,  so  perhaps  Christianity’s 


180 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


new  confession  of  faith  in  a  supernational  brother¬ 
hood  and  Christian  principles  for  social  and  economic 
life  must  stop  at  clearly  conceived  propositions  and 
sacred  tasks  without  being  able  to  combine  them  into 
a  logical  unity.  But  our  duty  is  clear.  I  do  not  think 
we  can  or  ought  to  be  contented  with  anything  less. 


V 

A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  SOME  OF  THE 
EFFORTS  ALREADY  MADE 


/ 


V 


A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  SOME  OF  THE 
EFFORTS  ALREADY  MADE 

A  DISCIPLE  who,  breathing  the  air  of  peace 
near  to  the  Master’s  heart,  is  anxions  to  re¬ 
fresh  and  vivify  the  Chnrch  with  that  spirit 
of  commnnion  and  brotherhood,1  has  in  the  first 
volume  of  this  series  told  us  encouraging  and  illumi¬ 
nating  facts  about  endeavours  for  unity  in  previous 
generations  and  its  necessity  and  outlook  in  our 
days.  By  reaction  the  Thirty  Years’  War  reminded 
Christendom  of  its  forgotten  duty  of  fellowship. 
Likewise  the  World  War  has  from  its  very  opening 
urged  upon  Christian  hearts  the  shame  and  weakness 
of  rupture  and  the  sacred  privilege  of  gathering 
round  the  Cross  as  a  uniting  power  which  transcends 
all  earthly  division. 

What  I  shall  describe  here  is  only  one  of  the  lines, 
converging  toward  Christian  fellowship.  In  Novem¬ 
ber,  1914,  the  following  appeal  for  peace  and  Chris¬ 
tian  fellowship  was  issued  by  the  Federal  Council 
of  the  Churches  of  Christ  in  America  and  by 
responsible  servants  of  the  Church  in  Denmark,  Fin¬ 
land,  Hungary,  Holland,  Norway,  Switzerland,  and 
Sweden : 

1  “If  Not  a  United  Church — What?”  Fleming  H.  Revell 
Co.,  New  York,  1920. 


183 


184 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


“The  war  is  causing  untold  distress.  Christ’s 
body,  the  Church,  suffers  and  mourns.  Mankind  in 
its  need,  cries  out,  0  Lord,  how  long?  The  tangle 
of  underlying  and  active  causes  which  accumulate  in 
the  course  of  time,  and  the  proximate  events  which 
led  to  the  breaking  of  peace,  are  left  to  history  to 
unravel.  God  alone  sees  and  judges  the  intents  and 
thoughts  of  the  heart. 

“We,  servants  of  the  Church,  address  to  all  those 
who  have  power  or  influence  in  the  matter  an  earnest 
appeal  seriously  to  keep  peace  before  their  eyes,  in 
order  that  bloodshed  soon  may  cease.  We  remind 
especially  our  Christian  brethren  of  various  nations 
that  war  cannot  sunder  the  bond  of  international 
union  that  Christ  holds  in  us.  Sure  it  is  that  every 
nation  and  every  realm  has  its  vocation  in  the  divine 
plan  of  the  world,  and  must,  even  in  the  face  of  heavy 
sacrifices,  fulfil  its  duty,  as  far  as  the  events  indi¬ 
cate  it  and  according  to  the  dim  conception  of  man. 
Our  faith  perceives  what  the  eye  cannot  always  see. 
The  strife  of  nations  must  finally  serve  the  dispen¬ 
sation  of  the  Almighty  and  all  the  faithful  in  Christ 
are  one.  Let  us  therefore  call  upon  God  that  He 
may  destroy  hate  and  enmity,  and  in  mercy  ordain 
peace  for  us.  His  will  be  done!” 

When  this  appeal  was  issued  it  was  deemed  in  cer¬ 
tain,  if  not  most  quarters,  as  a  rather  naive  good  in¬ 
tention,  unless  nationalism  with  angry  words  did  not 
condemn  any  such  reminder  of  communion.  Still  a 
fellowship  was  now  brought  about  which  during  the 
war  maintained  brisk  communications  with  those  on 
both  sides  of  the  contest.  The  war  has  been  in  some 


A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  EFFORTS  MADE  185 


respects  a  merciless  truth-teller.  The  thoughts  of 
many  a  heart  have  been  revealed.  Illusions  have  col¬ 
lapsed.  The  real  gold  has  been  painfully  melted  out, 
when  it  existed.  When  one  day  the  history  is  written 
of  Christian  unity  and  the  power  of  Christianity  to 
resist  evil  passions  and  the  suggestive  power  of  en¬ 
vironment  and  of  the  strength  or  weakness  of  the 
ecumenical  consciousness  in  the  different  branches  of 
the  Church,  the  documents  from  the  private  and 
public  discussions  on  Christian  communion  during 
the  years  of  war  will  provide  remarkable  testimonies, 
sad  evidence  of  human  weakness  or  pious  self-conceit, 
but  especially  proof  that  the  Church  in  all  countries 
has  its  spiritual  strength  not  in  organization  and 
external  power,  but  in  those  who  have  not  bowed  the 
knee  to  Baal  even  though  in  the  name  of  the  war-cult 
such  “sentimental  theologians  and  bishops”  have 
been  publicly  reviled  and  individual  Christians  have 
risked  their  lives  for  tlieir  fearlessness. 

There  is  neither  the  space  nor  the  possibility  to 
describe  here  the  efforts  for  unity  made  during  the 
war.  With  regard  to  America  I  may  refer  to  “Chris¬ 
tian  Unity:  Its  Principles  and  Possibilities,”  pub¬ 
lished  in  1921  by  the  Committee  on  the  War  and  the 
Religious  Outlook,  to  Dr.  Macfarland’s  “Progress  of 
Church  Federation,”  1921,  and  to  a  number  of  pub¬ 
lications,  especially  from  the  Federal  Council.  From 
the  five  neutral  countries  in  Europe  was  sent  at  Whit¬ 
suntide,  1917,  especially  on  account  of  the  commemo¬ 
ration  of  the  Reformation,  a  new  appeal,  “We  know 
in  part,”  from  which  the  following  words  may  be 
quoted : 


186 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


4 ‘Is  the  Western  civilization  doomed,  or  may  we 
expect  to  see  a  new  humanity,  in  some  respects  higher 
than  the  old  one,  emerge  from  this  destruction?  We 
hear  sublime  examples  of  fulfilled  duty,  of  self- 
discipline  and  self-denial,  and  of  devoted  readiness 
to  give  mutual  help.  Such  actions  invest  humanity 
with  a  higher  worth. 

“Still  more  manifest  are,  however,  the  disastrous 
effects  of  war  devastating  not  only  home  and  happi¬ 
ness  but  also  the  sanctity  of  morals  and  many  good 
and  steadying  habits  of  life. 

“Certain  it  is  that  whatever  may  become  the  issue 
of  the  war,  there  will  be  one  conquered,  our  cruelly 
lacerated  Christendom  and  civilization  itself,  whose 
workers  of  to-day  and  to-morrow  will  have  perished 
together  with  much  precious  work  accomplished  in 
the  past. 

“In  future,  as  hitherto,  we  are  prepared  to  serve 
as  intermediaries  for  keeping  up  or  restoring  com¬ 
munications  especially  in  religious  and  Church  mat¬ 
ters,  disturbed  by  the  war,  and  we  hope  in  this  way 
to  be  able  in  some  measure  to  serve  our  brethren  in 
the  belligerent  countries.  ” 

Among  those  who  availed  themselves  of  the  pro¬ 
posed  mediation  was  a  group  of  courageous  Chris¬ 
tians  of  different  denominations  in  England,  who, 
under  the  noble  presidency  of  Lord  Parmoor  and 
with  Miss  Marian  Ellis  as  their  indefatigable  secre¬ 
tary,  formed  themselves  into  the  British  Council  for 
Promoting  an  International  Christian  Meeting. 

This  appeal  had  also  a  grateful  allusion  to  the 
efforts  of  labour.  When  the  plan  for  an  interna- 


A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  EFFORTS  MADE  187 


tional  labour  conference  failed  for  the  moment,  The 
Challenge  said  in  September,  1917:  “We  believe  that 
an  immense  service  to  humanity  could  be  rendered 
by  an  earnest  attempt  on  the  part  of  all  sections  of 
the  Christian  Church  to  say  this  thing  unitedly  to 
the  world. 

“We  desire,  then,  to  see  summoned  an  interna¬ 
tional  interdenominational  Christian  conference,  the 
primary  aim  of  which  shall  be  the  proclamation  of 
Jesus  Christ  as  King,  to  Whom  an  absolute  allegiance 
is  due  and  in  Whose  service  alone  the  nations  find 
the  fulfilment  of  their  destiny.  On  the  basis  of  the 
faith  so  proclaimed  we  would  see  the  conference  pro¬ 
ceed  to  consider  by  what  means  the  sections  of  the 
Church  there  assembled  may  best  promote  within 
their  respective  countries  obedience  to  the  law  of 
Christ  in  international  affairs.  Further,  we  would 
see  them  test  how  far  they  could  reach  agreement  on 
the  principles  that  should  determine  the  terms  of 
peace  and  the  settlement  of  Europe,  Asia,  and 
Africa.  It  is  at  least  conceivable  that  they  would 
thus  materially  shorten  the  war,  partly  by  revealing 
the  amount  of  agreement  which  already  exists  in  men 
of  good-will,  partly  by  creating  some  further  measure 
of  that  agreement.  But  as  an  act  of  witness  the  con¬ 
ference  would  be  of  incalculable  importance.  It 
would  immensely  increase  the  opportunity  of  the 
Church  to  guide  the  world  when  the  war  is  over. 
After  the  war  men  will  respect  the  Church  in  pro¬ 
portion  as  during  the  war  it  has  been  something  more 
than  national.” 

The  invitation  to  a  conference  in  a  neutral  country 


188 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


was  hailed  as  an  essay  to  “find  a  way  of  discharging 
our  responsibility  to  Christendom  in  other  than 
papal  terms” — in  accordance  with  the  decision  ex¬ 
pressed  earlier  in  the  following  wrnrds: 

“We  desire  to  urge  with  all  possible  force  the  call¬ 
ing  of  a  conference  representing  the  chief  Christian 
bodies  in  all  belligerent  countries.  Let  the  Church 
take  the  lead  in  testifying  to  the  world  of  the  unity 
of  the  disciples  of  Christ  in  their  allegiance  to  Him. 
If  it  be  true  that  this  allegiance  transcends  all  earthly 
loyalties,  then  the  unity  resulting  from  it  must  trans¬ 
cend  all  earthly  divisions,  as  St.  Paul  emphatically 
and  repeatedly  affirmed.  The  world  is  longing  for 
the  manifestation  of  something  greater  than  warring 
nationalities.  The  Church  exists  to  be  that  greater 
thing.  Will  it  not  act?  The  time  is  ripe  and  oppor¬ 
tune.” 

The  British  Council  just  mentioned  said  about  its 
aim  as  follows:  “The  council  consists  of  men  and 
women  of  very  varied  religious  and  political  opinions. 
Their  object  is  to  promote  a  purely  religious  meeting 
which  will  discuss  neither  the  causes  of  the  war  nor 
the  political  conditions  of  peace,  but  which  will  dem¬ 
onstrate  the  true  unity  which  even  in  the  midst  of 
this  bitter  conflict  unites  all  Christians  in  allegiance 
to  their  common  Master.”  And  it  was  said  from  dif¬ 
ferent  quarters  that  such  a  conference  “might  well 
be  a  step  towards  that  reunion  of  Christians  which 
we  all  long  to  see,  that  unity  for  which  Christ  prayed. 
It  might  even  develop  into  a  permanent  organ  for 
expressing  the  mind  of  the  Church  upon  great  moral 
questions.  ’ 7 


A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  EFFORTS  MADE  189 


The  Berne  Conference  adjourned  in  the  autumn 
of  1915  in  the  hope  of  assembling  again  on  a  more 
extended  scale  in  one  of  the  Scandinavian  countries. 
How  living  the  idea  of  an  international  meeting  was 
can  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  it  came  forth  almost 
simultaneously  in  somewhat  varying  forms,  quite  in¬ 
dependently,  in  the  Christendom  of  the  North,  at  the 
instance  of  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  in  Scotland,  in  the 
above-mentioned  British  Council,  from  the  Evan¬ 
gelic  Christendom  of  Hungary,  in  The  Challenge  in 
London,  in  the  British  branch  of  the  World  Alliance 
for  Promoting  International  Friendship,  in  Switzer¬ 
land,  and  in  America.  From  three  Scandinavian 
bishops  an  invitation  was  issued  for  an  ecumenical 
conference  at  LTpsala  in  December,  1917.  The  com¬ 
munions  were  invited  to  send  representatives,  and 
leading  personages  received  a  special  invitation  in 
connection  with  a  meeting  of  the  neutral  groups  in 
the  World  Alliance.  The  invitation  was  eagerly  ap¬ 
proved,  as  is  testified  not  least  by  the  greetings  to  the 
conference  from  both  the  warring  factions  and  from 
the  meeting  in  London  held  at  the  same  time.  A 
gentle  patriarch  of  the  Church  in  Germany,  Dr. 
Dryander,  thanked  4 ‘the  Scandinavian  brothers”  for 
their  trouble  in  trying  to  make  it  possible  to  apply 
the  Saviour’s  pontifical  prayer,  “that  they  may  all 
be  one.” 

A  verdict  on  the  programme  sent  out  by  the  Upsala 
Conference  w'as  seen  in  a  public  declaration,  after¬ 
wards  receiving  increasingly  numerous  adherents,  by 
a  number  of  German  clergymen,  in  which  they  ex¬ 
pressed  their  “whole-hearted  love  and  unalterable 


190 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


faith’ ’  to  their  native  country,  and  then  continued: 

‘‘But  above  the  fatherland  is  God’s  kingdom,  which 
stretches  over  all  countries  and  whose  Gospel  is 
‘righteousness  and  peace  and  love.f  It  would  be  a 
poor  service  to  the  Gospel  if  we  did  not  keep  sway 
over  the  passions  that  have  been  aroused  by  this  war 
between  nations,  but  relapsed  instead  into  chauvinism, 
which  would  change  us,  the  messengers  of  peace,  to 
‘war  theologians.’  It  is  also  pointed  out  that  a  de¬ 
ficient  sense  of  righteousness,  the  worship  of  mammon, 
and  self-satisfied  culture  are  the  causes  of  the  war. 

“Against  all  this  to  defend  dauntlessly  righteous¬ 
ness,  love,  and  values  that  are  higher  than  material 
ones,  briefly,  to  serve  the  dominion  of  God,  is  the  most 
elementary  duty  of  our  office.  By  doing  so  we  serve 
our  country  at  the  same  time,  for  it  can  flourish  only 
under  God’s  dominion. 

“We  therefore  hail  with  gratitude  the  setting-up 
of  the  same  Christian  moral  claims  now  at  Upsala 
and  elsewhere  both  in  neutral  and  hostile  countries. 
We  believe  that  this  ‘new,’  but  really  ancient  spirit 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  will  make  its  way  past  all 
obstacles,  however  great,  and  bring  with  it  to  the  na¬ 
tions,  as  the  highest,  though  slowly  maturing,  aim 
of  war,  a  future  in  righteousness  and  happiness.” 

The  Archbishop  of  Poland  expressed  his  great  joy 
that  in  the  land  of  the  Yasas  a  conference  had  been 
summoned  by  those  who  believe  in  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  and  acknowledge  in  Him  the  Saviour  and 
Master,  in  order  to  discuss  the  import  of  this,  the  most 
terrible  of  all  wars,  and  the  realization  of  peace  upon 
earth.  He  thought  it  right  and  proper  that  all  Chris- 


A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  EFFORTS  MADE  191 


tians,  without  distinction  of  creed,  should  proceed 
together  to  work  for  the  fulfilling  of  Jesus  Christ’s 
message:  “A  new  message  I  give  you,  that  ye  love 
one  another.”  He  hoped  for  a  blessing  on  the  work 
and  results  of  the  meeting. 

The  most  representative  delegates  were  appointed 
by  the  Evangelic  communities  of  Hungary  and  Ger¬ 
many.  But  the  time  was  too  short  for  more  dis¬ 
tant  countries.  The  passport  question  caused  the 
well-known  difficulties.  The  conference  was  therefore 
limited  to  the  five  neutral  Evangelic  countries  whose 
delegates  united  in  the  following  declaration  “for 
reflection  and  guidance  in  the  continued  work  of 
the  Church” — an  attempt  to  gain  firm  and  uniform 
lines  for  the  work  toward  peace  that  is  incumbent 
upon  the  Christian  Church: 

“When  our  Christian  confession  speaks  of  one  Holy 
Catholic  Church,  it  reminds  us  of  that  deep  inner 
unity  that  all  Christians  possess  in  Christ  and  in  the 
work  of  His  Spirit  in  spite  of  all  national  and  denomi¬ 
national  differences.  Without  ingratitude  or  unfaith¬ 
fulness  to  those  special  gifts  in  Christian  experience 
and  conception,  which  each  community  has  obtained 
from  the  God  of  history,  this  unity,  which  in  the 
deepest  sense  is  to  be  found  at  the  Cross  of  Christ, 
ought  to  be  realized  in  life  and  teaching  better  than 
hitherto. 

“The  great  mission  of  the  Christian  community  is 
to  be  the  salt  of  the  earth  and  the  light  of  the  world. 
This  the  Evangelic  Church  can  and  must  fulfil  only 
spiritually  by  means  of  her  teaching  and  her  life. 
The  Church  ought  to  be  the  living  conscience  of  na- 


192 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


tions  and  of  men.  Together  with  Christians  in  all 
belligerent  countries,  we  feel  deeply  the  opposition 
between  the  war  and  the  spirit  of  Christ.  We  there¬ 
fore  wish  to  emphasize  some  principal  points  con¬ 
cerning  the  conduct  of  Christians  in  social  life. 

“1.  The  Church,  which  has  unfortunately  not  sel¬ 
dom  laid  more  stress  upon  that  which  divides  than 
that  which  unites,  ought  to  enforce  the  ideal  of  Chris¬ 
tian  brotherhood,  arouse  and  strengthen  the  judgment 
upon  selfishness,  and  employ  all  its  powers  in  the 
work  for  the  removal  of  the  causes  of  war,  whether 
these  be  of  a  social,  economic,  or  political  nature. 

“2.  Christians  ought  to  feel  their  share  in  the  re¬ 
sponsibility  for  public  opinion;  they  ought  to  serve 
the  cause  of  truth  and  love  in  public  national  and 
international  life  as  well  as  in  personal  relations,  and 
to  try  to  understand  the  assumptions  that  lie  behind 
the  utterances,  thoughts,  and  deeds  of  others. 

“3.  The  Church  ought  to  educate  the  nations  to  a 
higher  and  higher  degree  of  self-government. 

“4.  The  Church  ought  to  work  for  international 
understanding  and  the  settlement  of  international 
controversies  through  mediation  and  arbitration. 

“  According  to  the  Christian  conception  the  con¬ 
sciousness  of  right  and  wrong  and  the  system  of  law 
and  political  order  that  arise  from  this  consciousness, 
are  good  gifts  from  God  to  man.  The  Gospel  re¬ 
quires  for  its  work  at  least  an  elementary  legal  order. 
Every  existing  form  of  law  and  justice  is  incomplete 
and  requires  to  be  developed  in  proportion  as  the 
moral  sense  becomes  more  perfect. 

“For  this  reason  the  Church  has  in  the  name  of 


A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  EFFORTS  MADE  193 


Christ  to  vindicate  the  sanctity  of  justice  and  law, 
and  to  demand  its  further  development.  In  the  first 
place,  the  Church  ought  to  do  this  with  all  its  might 
within  each  separate  country,  but  it  is  also  its  im¬ 
perative  duty  to  support,  as  far  as  it  lies  in  its  power, 
the  effort  for  the  international  establishment  of  jus¬ 
tice  embodied  in  law.  It  ought  therefore  to  fight 
against  any  glorification  of  violence  and  force  at  the 
expense  of  justice  and  law,  and  to  lay  stress  upon 
the  axiom  that  even  the  acts  of  nations  and  States 
are  subject  to  ethical  principles  just  as  much  as  those 
of  the  individual,  and  that  the  commonwealth  of  na¬ 
tions  ought  to  be  built  upon  the  principles  of  truth, 
justice,  and  love. 

“The  Church  ought  humbly  to  confess  that  it  has 
failed  in  this  respect,  and  ought  to  strive  with  all  its 
might  to  rectify  its  shortcomings. 

“The  different  systems  of  law  both  within  a  single 
nation  and  between  nations  are  imperfect  and  inef¬ 
fective  except  in  so  far  as  they  are  inspired  by  a  real 
inward  moral  conviction.  To  produce  and  further 
such  a  spirit  of  Christian  brotherly  love,  self-control, 
and  mutual  righteousness,  is  the  foremost  duty  of  the 
Church  in  this  aspect  of  life.” 

The  invitation  to  this  conference  at  Upsala  in  De¬ 
cember,  1917,  and,  as  this  was  not  complete,  to  a 
meeting  during  1918,  met  with  recognition  and  sym¬ 
pathy  from  most  communions  and  groups  that  are 
religiously  awake,  as  it  did  everywhere  among  the 
individuals  who  had  not  sacrificed  their  Christian 
honour  on  the  altar  of  the  gods  of  war.  Of  course 
refusals  were  also  received.  Many  earnest  servants 


194 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


of  the  Church  were  doubtful  about  a  meeting  while 
war  was  still  being  waged,  and  looked  forward  to  the 
ecumenical  conference  that  we  are  now  working  for 
and  that  was  afterwards  called  the  Universal  Con¬ 
ference  of  the  Church  of  Christ  on  Life  and  Work. 

At  the  same  time  the  British  Council  of  the  World 
Alliance  held  a  public  conference  in  London,  where 
Dean  Inge  urged  that  “this  mutual  suicide  club  will 
have  to  be  dissolved.”  The  Bishop  of  Peterborough 
made  the  opening  speech.  The  resolution  passed 
emphasized  the  duty  “to  bring  all  public  sentiment 
in  action  under  the  control  of  the  Mind  and  Spirit 
of  Christ.”  The  belief  was  strengthened  that  “the 
time  is  ripe  for  the  Church  to  act  as  a  pioneer  of 
supernational  thinking  and  an  interpreter  of  inter¬ 
national  fellow-feeling.  ’  ’ 

That  the  International  Christian  Conference  should 
be  held  during  the  war  was  strongly  advocated  in 
March,  1918,  at  a  public  meeting  at  Kingsway  Hall 
by  the  British  Council  for  such  a  meeting.  A  note¬ 
worthy  suggestion  was  that  the  members  of  that  con¬ 
ference  should  go  there  as  officially  sent  representa¬ 
tives  of  the  various  religious  bodies.  The  greetings 
and  the  theses  sent  by  the  conference  in  Upsala  in 
December,  1917,  were  kindly  received  and  even  for¬ 
mally  accepted  in  many  quarters,  from  Constan¬ 
tinople  to  America. 

Special  mention  is  due  to  the  active  interest  shown 
independently  from  the  Orthodox  section  of  the 
Church.  May  we  not  consider  that  the  encyclical, 
sent  by  the  Patriarchate  in  Constantinople  to  the 
different  parts  of  Evangelic  Christendom  on  the 


A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  EFFORTS  MADE  195 


necessity  of  closer  alliance  in  order  to  meet  tlie  crav¬ 
ings  of  our  epoch  for  a  League  of  Churches  corre¬ 
sponding  to  the  League  of  Nations,  may  we  not  con¬ 
sider  this  appeal  and  various  actions  of  the  Greek 
Orthodox  Church  in  that  respect  as  beginning  a  new 
epoch  in  the  relationship  between  West  and  East  in 
the  Church  of  Christ?  In  the  encyclical  the  patri¬ 
archate  laid  special  stress  upon  co-operation  for  prac¬ 
tical  aims.  During  the  great  preparatory  meeting 
for  the  Conference  on  Faith  and  Order  at  Geneva  in 
1920,  Greek  representatives  agreed  that  the  unity  in 
the  Church  of  Christ  must  at  first,  as  Dr.  Curtis  styles 
it  in  Die  EicJie,  be  a  union  of  love. 

A  brilliant  and  whole-hearted  divine,  who  was  sent 
by  the  patriarchate  first  to  Geneva  and  then  to 
Sweden,  the  principal  of  the  Academy  on  Halki, 
Archbishop  Germanas,  has  made  the  volume  for  Sep- 
tember-October,  1921,  of  Neos  Dolmen  a  veritable 
epistle  on  Church  unity  and  the  strivings  for  it. 

But  we  are  going  too  fast.  The  meeting  in  Oud 
Wassenaer  in  1919  gave  its  blessing  to  an  ecumenical 
conference  of  the  different  Christian  communions  to 
consider  urgent  practical  tasks  before  the  Church  at 
this  time,  and  the  possibilities  of  co-operation  in  testi¬ 
mony  and  action.  Delegates  who  gathered  later  in 
Paris  appointed,  according  to  a  suggestion  by  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  a  committee  of  one  for 
preparation.  This  one  man  became  a  well-known  cham¬ 
pion  for  international  Christian  fellowship  and  good¬ 
will,  Frederick  Lynch.  I  have  already  told  how  the 
preliminary  meeting  at  Geneva,  August  9-12,  1920, 
was  able  through  God’s  help  to  overcome  hindrances 


196 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


that  had  to  be  met.  It  was  providential  that  Arthur  J. 
Brown  acted  as  president  at  the  most  critical  moment 
and  constituted  the  nucleus  of  the  large  representative 
committee  of  arrangements  as  well  as  the  beginning 
of  an  executive  committee  in  three  sections,  one  for 
Europe,  one  for  the  British  Empire,  and  one  for 
America,  on  the  Universal  Conference  of  the  Church 
of  Christ  on  Life  and  Work.  At  a  meeting  under 
the  chairmanship  of  the  Bishop  of  Peterborough  in 
1921,  that  executive  committee  recommended  the  pro¬ 
posed  Universal  Conference  to  the  prayers  of  fellow 
Christians  in  every  race  and  country  and,  inspired 
by  William  P.  Merrill,  asked  them  to  pray  now  and 
continually : 

For  the  coming  of  a  fuller  unity  of  spirit  and  of 
action  in  the  entire  Church  of  Christ  through  the 
world, 

For  readiness  on  the  part  of  all  Christians  to  make 
new  ventures  of  faith,  and  to  take  more  seriously  the 
implications  of  the  Gospel, 

For  the  deepening  and  broadening  of  love  among 
all  Christ’s  followers  toward  all  men, 

For  the  elimination  of  all  passion  and  prejudice, 
and  the  growth  of  peace  and  brotherhood, 

For  clearer  vision  of  the  will  of  God  and  of  the 
work  of  Christ  in  this  day, 

For  all  that  may  further  the  coming  of  His  king¬ 
dom. 

Especially  do  they  ask  their  fellow  Christians 
everywhere  to  pray  for  the  success  of  the  conference 
which  is  to  consider  how  best  the  teaching  and  pur¬ 
pose  of  our  Master  can  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the 


A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  EFFORTS  MADE  197 


manifold  problems  which  beset  ns.  The  united  and 
unceasing  intercession  of  all  Christians  is  asked,  that 
through  this  gathering  of  Christians  from  all  over 
the  world  the  Church  may  come  to  a  clear  realization 
of  its  opportunity  and  its  responsibility,  and  that 
through  it  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God  may  find  an  ever 
larger  impact  in  the  minds  and  wills  of  men.  Let 
us  pray  that  through  His  working  mankind  may  be 
led  into  the  larger  life  which  is  in  Him,  and  the  whole 
creation,  now  groaning  and  travailing  in  pain,  may 
be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption  and 
brought  into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  sons  of  God.” 

A  considerable  number  of  Christian  communions  in 
the  New  World  and  in  the  Old  World  have  already 
appointed  official  delegates  to  the  committee  of  ar¬ 
rangements  on  such  a  universal  Church  meeting. 
Others  will  follow.  Last  year,  1922,  at  a  new  session 
of  the  executive  committee  at  Helsingborg,  Sweden, 
important  decisions  were  taken.  Official  representa¬ 
tives  from  the  Church  in  the  Old  World  and  in  the 
New  World,  from  Western  Christendom  and  from 
the  Orthodox  communion,  have  never  before  met  with 
such  authority  for  such  an  undertaking.  Preparatory 
work  is  eagerly  being  done  in  the  three  sections,  har¬ 
moniously  and  in  constant  mutual  communication, 
but  at  the  same  time  independently,  in  order  not  to 
copy  one  or  the  other,  because  our  God  does  not  like 
copies,  but  originals.  It  is  comparatively  easy  to 
create  big  and  beautiful  schemes  of  organization  and 
work,  but  nothing  is  more  necessary  than  to  indi¬ 
vidualize  every  Christian  endeavour  and  build  such  a 
comprehensive  act  of  Christian  fellowship  on  realities 


198 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


and  labours  already  deeply  rooted  in  the  special 
character  of  each  people,  each  communion,  and  each 
great  section  of  Christendom.  Thus  preparatory  con¬ 
ferences  have  been  held  and  others  will  be  held,  after 
thoroughgoing  introductory  work,  in  the  three  sec¬ 
tions  mentioned  above.  As  to  the  time  of  the  Uni¬ 
versal  Conference,  there  are  two  considerations, 
which  seem  to  contradict  each  other.  On  the  one 
hand  a  new  Nicsea  for  United  Life  and  Work  of 
Christendom  must  be  prepared  in  a  way  worthy  of 
such  an  aim;  on  the  other  hand,  we  who  met  at 
Geneva  in  1920  cannot  help  seeing  the  mournful, 
emaciated  face  of  that  venerable  Hungarian  brother 
and  hearing  his  passionate  voice  crying  out,  when 
wise  men  asked  us  to  wait  and  see,  “Brethren,  can 
we  wait?  Evil  does  not  wait.” 

In  the  corner  of  the  world  where  this  is  written, 
an  action  for  the  same  purpose  was  initiated  in  1914 
by  Olaus  Petri  Stiftelsen,  a  Foundation  in  the  Uni¬ 
versity  of  Upsala,  which,  for  many  years,  invited 
eminent  scholars  and  men  of  religion  to  lecture  on 
subjects  bearing  upon  the  history  and  problems  of 
religion  and  published  their  lectures.  This  Founda¬ 
tion  decided  to  summon  leading  Churchmen  and  emi¬ 
nent  theologians  from  different  parts  of  Christendom 
to  lecture  on  Church  unity  and  on  the  relation  of 
their  own  communion  to  this  question.  The  lectures 
already  published  in  the  series  on  Church  unity,  all 
marked  with  the  motto  of  Olaus  Petri  Stiftelsen, 
“The  truth  shall  make  you  free,”  constitute  a  unique 
set  of  documents,  and  are  a  strong  witness  to  Chris¬ 
tian  solidarity  in  spite  of  earthly  divisions.  They 


A  BRIEF  SURVEY  OF  EFFORTS  MADE  199 


treat  the  subject  from  the  standpoint  of  the  com¬ 
munions  of  Sweden,  Denmark,  Norway,  Finland,  Ice¬ 
land,  Holland,  Switzerland,  Hungary,  England  (the 
Church  as  wTell  as  Nonconformity),  Germany,  Scot¬ 
land,  America,  the  Patriarchate  and  the  Holy  Synod 
in  Constantinople,  from  Russia,  Greece,  and  France. 
Still  others  have  promised  to  come  and  give  their 
views  on  Church  unity. 


IMMEDIATE  AIMS 


VI 


IMMEDIATE  AIMS 


I  Evangelic  catholicity  is  a  pressing  need  if 


dismemberment  is  not  to  cause  hopeless  weak- 


**  *“■  ness.  Unity  must  assert  itself  without  waiting 
for  community  in  doctrine  and  Church  government. 
The  voice  of  the  Christian  conscience  cannot  be  si¬ 
lenced.  But  it  has  not  been  heard  as  it  ought  to  have 
been.  This  is  due  to  weakness  and  neglect,  and  also 
to  the  lack  of  a  platform.  We  must  create  one  in  a 
common  organization,  so  built  up  that  it  can  worthily 
represent  Christianity  without  sectarianly  excluding 
any  part  of  it. 

If  Rome  finds  it  difficult  to  embark  upon  such 
equal  co-operation,  represented  by  an  ecumenical 
Church  council,  then  the  rest  of  Christianity  must 
make  a  beginning.  The  American  envoys  for  the 
World  Conference  on  Faith  and  Order,  1919,  were 
told  by  the  Pope  in  Rome,  if  they  did  not  know  it 
beforehand,  that  Rome  is  unable  to  join  with  other 
sections  of  Christendom  in  such  an  undertaking.  As 
a  consequence  of  that  visit  the  Saint  Office  revived  in 
July,  1919,  a  decretal  of  1864,  forbidding  Roman 
Catholics  to  partake  in  meetings  or  preparations  for 
Church  unity,1  but  il  y  a  des  accomodations  avec  le 

1  La  Civilta  Catholica,  1919,  s.  197. 


203 


204 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


del .  Even  inside  the  Roman  communion  a  single 
Churchman  can  be  moved  by  faith  to  listen  to  the 
voice  of  the  One  Shepherd  about  unity  in  the  sense  of 
the  brotherly  and  trustful  solidarity  of  all  disciples 
of  Christ.  If  conferences  on  Faith  and  Constitution 
go  against  Roman  exclusiveness,  it  is  a  self-evident 
fact  that  Roman  Christians  already  have  joined  and 
can  in  the  future  join  with  other  Christians  for  com¬ 
mon  practical  tasks.  These  are  beautiful  proofs  of 
an  ecumenical  spirit  of  fellowship  in  Roman  Catholic 
prelates  in  the  United  States  and  elsewhere.  We 
must  therefore  not  look  too  much  askance  to  the 
right  or  to  the  left  but  follow  the  Master  forward. 
The  Evangelic  part  and  the  Orthodox  part  of  the 
Church  would  even  now  be  able  to  find  a  formula  for 
a  mutual  understanding  which  leaves  the  confession 
and  the  constitution  of  the  separate  religious  com¬ 
munities  undisturbed  and  which  obtains  its  vital 
power  and  its  inspiration  from  the  Gospel. 

The  Catholic  Church  has  three  main  sections:  the 
Orthodox  Catholic,  the  Roman  Catholic,  and  the 
Evangelic  Catholic. 

If  we  try  to  fulfil  the  duty  laid  upon  us  by  the 
Master  Himself,  Rome  also  may  sometime  be  willing 
to  join  a  Catholic  Church  that  does  not  exclude  any 
time  believers.  Let  the  Spirit  build  up  an  Evan¬ 
gelic  catholicity  in  men’s  minds  in  united  Xife  and 
Work.  The  day  will  come  when  Roman  and  other 
communions  which,  excluding  themselves  from  organ¬ 
ized  fellowship,  cannot  exclude  ecumenical  souls  in 
their  midst  from  the  One,  Holy,  Catholic  and  Apos¬ 
tolic  Church,  will  come  and  find  the  door  open  and 


IMMEDIATE  AIMS  205 

enter  to  praise  and  worship  with  the  whole  of 
Christ’s  flock. 

We  must  have  the  Christian  Internationale  wThich 
was  proclaimed  during  the  war  at  a  meeting  in  Ox¬ 
ford  and  pursued  in  an  enthusiastic  way  by  the 
Bilthoven  movement.  We  must  have  a  permanent 
Council  of  the  Church,  which  Canon  Masterman 
would  like  to  see  assembled  once  in  Jerusalem,  Prepa¬ 
rations  are  needed.  But  they  have  been  most  thor¬ 
oughly  accomplished  during  many  years,  especially 
in  Germany  and  England.  The  social  duties  of  the 
Church  have  been  treated  in  a  weighty  literature  and 
experienced  in  adventures  of  faith  and  love. 

The  Universal  Conference  itself  should  be  a  fact 
more  important  than  we  can  now  imagine.  It  will 
be  composed  of  men  and  women  in  whose  hearts 
Christian  love  is  burning,  as  well  as  earnest  and 
prayerful  thought  and  experience  about  the  duties 
and  opportunities  of  the  flock  of  Christ.  When  they 
come  together  they  must  not  hurry,  although  our 
longed-for  meeting  will  gather  persons  who  have  no 
spare  time  to  give  to  conferences  and  talks.  Our 
Saviour  gave  full  time  to  each  person  and  to  each 
case.  Every  one  will  see  beforehand  that  if  such  a 
gathering  comes  into  existence  through  the  grace  of 
God,  Who  is  able  to  do  superabundantly  above  all 
that  we  ask  or  think  according  to  the  power  that 
worketh  in  us,  it  must  not  devote  less  than  two  months 
or  six  weeks  to  such  an  errand  in  the  Master’s 
service. 

If  peace  conferences  and  economical  conferences 
last  weeks  and  weeks,  would  it  not  be  unworthy  of 


206 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


our  sacred  duty  not  to  give  full  time  for  mature 
counsel,  prayer,  and  meditation  in  a  meeting  of  the 
universal  Church  of  Christ?  Those  servants  of  the 
Christian  communions  should  not  come  together  to 
make  decisions  already  prepared.  Preparations  must 
be  made  in  addition  to,  and  in  order  to  sum  up,  the 
enormous  amount  of  experiences  and  of  thinking 
accomplished  in  this  domain.  “It  is  sufficiently  evi¬ 
dent  that  this  enterprise  is  one  of  enormous  scope, 
and  will  need  the  most  careful  preparations/ ’  But 
the  result  that  we  wish  for  cannot  be  reached  with¬ 
out  a  full  and  deep  spiritual  labour  done  by  those 
workers  in  common. 

I  need  not  try  to  outline  here  the  programme  that 
has  been  proposed  in  several  connections  and  that 
must  not  be  too  overburdened  but  concentrated  on 
two  or  three  main  points.  It  is  obvious.  Nothing  can 
be  more  illuminating  than  to  see  how  for  three  years 
or  more  every  month,  nay,  every  week,  brings  new, 
independent  expressions  of  the  same  necessity  felt  in 
different  quarters  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  The 
executive  committee  tried  to  define  the  aim  in  the 
following  way: 

“The  purpose  of  the  Conference  is  not  primarily 
to  promote  the  reunion  of  Christendom,  though  such 
co-operation  between  the  Churches  as  it  proposed 
would  undoubtedly  help  to  this  end.  It  is  not  in¬ 
tended  to  deal  with  questions  of  Faith  and  Order. 
The  purpose  is  rather  to  concentrate  the  thought  of 
Christendom  on  the  mind  of  Christ  as  revealed  in 
the  Gospels  towards  those  great  social  questions,  in¬ 
dustrial  and  international,  which  are  so  acutely 
•  * 


IMMEDIATE  AIMS 


207 


urgent  in  every  country.  Believing  that  only  in 
Christ’s  way  of  life  can  the  world  find  healing  and 
rest,  we  desire  to  discover  how  best  this  can  be  con¬ 
fronted.  The  need  for  making  some  such  concerted 
endeavour  to  learn  afresh  the  mind  of  Christ  cannot 
be  exaggerated.  The  nations  are  yearning  for  purer 
politics.  Industrial  unrest  is  producing  chaos  and 
confusion.  The  basic  motives  of  citizenship  need 
strong  reinforcement.  In  international  affairs  men 
are  seeking  anxiously  for  permanent  peace  and 
deeper  fellowship.  We  believe  that  the  message  and 
teaching  of  Jesus  Christ  afford  the  only  solution.  To 
set  ourselves  to  discover  His  will  and  under  the  guid¬ 
ance  of  His  Spirit  to  find  wise  ways  of  applying  His 
teaching,  would  seem  to  be  the  paramount  task  of 
the  Church.” 

(1)  The  first  need  can  be  called  diaconia,  including 
works  of  love,  performed  by  the  Church  as  such  or  by 
free  organizations  in  the  Church  in  different  coun¬ 
tries.  Eager  workers  in  such  a  blessed  service  are 
coming  to  ask  everywhere  in  each  country,  in  each 
Christian  communion,  where  the  same  problems  are 
felt:  Why  can  we  not  work  together,  give  each  other 
our  experiences,  follow  common  wise  directions  and 
be  represented,  as  well  as  other  undertakings  for  help 
and  relief,  in  an  international  way,  according  not 
only  to  the  actual  state  and  need  of  the  world,  but 
also  according  to  the  supernational  character  of 
Christ ’s  message  ?  Such  Christian  charity  is  intended 
for  the  help  and  rescue  of  the  individual,  but  it  can¬ 
not  be  exercised  in  any  earnest  and  elaborate  way 
without  leading  to  the  great  problems  of  economic 


208 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


and  civic  order.  Nothing  less  is  needed  than  the 
Christianizing  of  society. 

(2)  Are  we  not  brethren,  are  we  not  children  of 
the  same  heavenly  Father?  How  can  such  a  holy 
fellowship  suffer  organized  violence  to  use  human 
brains  and  arms  and  the  perfection  of  science  and 
technique  for  a  devilish  killing  of  the  fittest?  Chris¬ 
tendom  must  mean  more  for  the  future  than  it  has 
meant  in  the  past  against  war  and  for  furthering 
international  good-will  and  peace  through  righteous¬ 
ness. 

(3)  Only  the  united  work  of  the  Church  can  help 
suffering  minorities  to  get  their  rights.  If  included 
in  a  whole  family  of  the  Church,  sections  of  it  which 
have  quarrels  and  difficulties  with  each  other  can 
more  easily  be  brought  into  mutual  understanding, 
why  cannot  the  seemingly  hopeless  complications 
created  by  the  new  disputed  frontiers  in  the  East 
of  Europe  with  regard  to  the  different  denominations, 
why  cannot  they  be  brought  before  the  love  and  wis¬ 
dom  of  a  unitedly  working  Church?  We  realized  it 
when  our  Polish  brethren  of  the  four  chief  Evan¬ 
gelic  communions  in  the  revived  Poland  met  in 
Upsala  in  March,  1921,  with  us,  servants  of  the 
Church  in  America,  Switzerland  and  the  Northern 
countries.  Experience  from  the  World  Alliance 
makes  us  long  impatiently  for  a  common  permanent 
representation  to  which  difficulties  of  all  kinds  can 
be  referred  by  suffering  sections  of  the  Church. 

(4)  Here  we  arrive  at  the  most  generally  desired 
ecumenical  council  of  which  much  has  been  spoken 


IMMEDIATE  AIMS 


209 


in  this  book;  namely,  a  common  tongue  for  the  Chris¬ 
tian  conscience  for  that  which  the  Christian  con¬ 
science  knows  to  be  true  and  which  it  longs  to  cry 
out  to  all  the  world.  The  Universal  Conference  will 
create  such  a  common  speaking  trumpet  that  must 
not  in  any  way  become  an  instrument  of  external 
authority,  but  a  body  having  only  a  spiritual  au¬ 
thority.  It  shall  be  a  general  Christian  council  or 
an  ecumenical  committee  or  council  consisting  of 
representative  delegates.  Such  an  organ  would  be 
listened  to  on  burning  religious  and  moral  questions 
and  have  influence  to  the  degree  in  which  it  would 
be  able  to  make  itself  the  vehicle  of  the  Christian 
conscience  and  the  spirit  of  Christ,  amid  the  storms 
of  the  age. 

As  to  its  composition,  careful  consideration  is 
wanted.  It  must  not  be  bulky,  but  spiritually  strong 
and  effective.  Some  confidential  posts  in  the  Church 
ought  to  belong  to  the  ecumenical  council  without 
election,  such  as  the  patriarchate  in  Constantinople, 
the  see  of  Canterbury  and  the  presidencies  of  the 
Federal  Council  of  the  Churches  of  Christ  in  America 
and  of  the  Kirch enbund  in  Germany.  Other  mem¬ 
bers  must  be  elected  in  order  to  afford  the  fullest 
possible  representation  in  a  small  number  for  Scot¬ 
land,  British  Nonconformity,  Holland,  Switzerland, 
France,  Evangelic  bodies  in  the  East,  the  Scandi¬ 
navian  and  Baltic  North,  etc.,  grouped  together  in 
some  four  or  five  sections.  It  is  conceivable  that 
some  communions  or  groups  can  be  represented  on 
the  ecumenical  council  in  their  proper  turns  with  in- 


210 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


tervals  of  five  years  or  less.  The  chairmanship  can 
also  move  from  one  group  to  another  in  order  to 
make  the  council  as  ecumenical  as  possible. 

But  the  most  essential  thing  in  creating  and  per¬ 
petuating  such  a  common  herald  for  Christendom  will 
be  that  it  is  supported  by  the  prayers  and  the  con¬ 
fidence  of  the  Christian  people  all  over  the  world. 
Many  have  certainly  had  the  same  experience  as 
myself  that  the  questions  here  treated  excite  a  veri¬ 
table  enthusiasm  in  the  rank  and  file  of  our  com¬ 
munions.  I  think  that  the  flock  of  faithful  laymen 
and  laywomen  in  the  Church  has  a  less  obscured  sense 
of  the  shameful  nonsense  in  many  of  our  discrep¬ 
ancies,  than  many  trained  officers  of  the  Church.  It 
is  a  source  of  ever  renewed  strength,  in  the  midst  of 
obstacles  and  worldly  wise  indifference  to  the  crav¬ 
ings  for  unity,  to  meet  in  the  Christian  people  of  all 
groups  a  powerful  response  to  the  call  for  fellowship 
and  to  the  adventures  of  the  united  Life  and  Work 
of  Christendom.  Sometimes  one  feels  strongly  that 
the  Christian  people  at  large  would  hail  united  Life 
and  Work  as  a  longed-for  boon,  if  some  leaders  did 
not  try  with  some  success  to  keep  their  beloved 
divisions  intact.  In  advocating  the  cause  of  unity 
you  will  experience  almost  a  Pentecost  in  the  rank 
and  file  of  faithful  Christians.  A  venerable  patriarch 
in  the  Church  of  Christ  has  in  an  Anglican  official 
report,  which  we  partly  include  here,  expressed  our 
aim  with  unrivalled  acuteness:  “We  wish  to  say  that 
we  use  the  word  Church  without  any  controversy  and 
in  the  largest  possible  sense  to  mean  ‘all  who  profess 
and  call  themselves  Christian.  ’  We  know  and  de- 


IMMEDIATE  AIMS 


211 


plore  the  divisions  of  Christendom,  and  we  do  not  in 
the  least  underrate  the  difficulties  involved  in  healing 
ancient  wounds  and  restoring  violated  fellowship. 
We  do  not  underestimate  the  theological  and  consti¬ 
tutional  questions  involved.  But  we  say  deliberately 
that  in  the  region  of  moral  or  social  questions  we 
desire  all  Christians  to  begin  at)  once  to  act  together 
as  if  they  were  one  body,  in  one  visible  fellowship. 
This  could  be  done  by  all  alike  without  any  injury 
to  theological  principles.  And  to  bring  all  Christians 
together  to  act  in  this  one  department  of  life  as  one 
visible  body  would  involve  no  loss  and  manifold  gain. 
We  should  get  to  know  and  trust  one  another:  we 
should  learn  to  act  together:  we  should  thus  prepare 
the  way  for  fuller  unity.” 

CONCLUSION 

Shoals  of  sand,  wide  and  narrow,  separate  bodies 
of  water  and  river  beds  into  a  confused,  dispersed 
system,  continually  invading  new  ground  and  by  its 
swampy  disorder  preventing  both  the  ground  and  the 
water  from  doing  their  full  work.  Spades  are  set 
working,  machines  are  invented,  the  work  proceeds 
year  after  year.  It  is  necessary  to  dig  through  the 
shoals,  unite  the  separated  and  incalculable  waters, 
and  give  the  river  a  single  deep  channel  and  a  single 
mighty  flow.  Here  and  there  it  is  possible  to  break 
through  a  barrier  and  unite  the  streams,  but  soon  the 
banks  of  the  channel  give  away.  It  is  a  task  of 
Sisyphus,  a  web  of  Penelope.  Still  the  workers  do 
not  lose  courage.  It  must  once  succeed.  They  rejoice 


212 


CHRISTIAN  FELLOWSHIP 


at  every  stream  tliat  is  moulded  into  shape,  every 
piece  of  ground  that  is  won  or  drained. 

But  suppose  a  miracle  should  happen.  Suppose  the 
breaking  of  the  ice  up  in  the  hills  should  take  place 
so  rapidly  and  so  abundantly  that  the  spring  flood 
comes  with  force,  breaking  down  all  obstacles  and 
creating  what  man’s  industry  could  not,  namely,  a 
collected  flow  of  water,  a  powerful  river,  which,  soon 
grown  calm,  shall  farther  down,  reflect  the  summer 
sun  in  its  single  majestic  flow.  Can  we  already  hear 
the  roar?  Or  is  it  our  longing  and  our  prayers  to 
the  Spirit  that  deceive  us? 

The  figure  has  been  used  for  the  unity  of  the 
Church.  We  must  not  grow  tired.  For  we  have  the 
Lord’s  commandment  and  His  promise.  We  have 
something  more.  We  have  His  Spirit.  We  can  only 
watch  and  pray,  trust  and  work.  When  the  Spirit 
of  the  Lord  pervades  our  sundered,  materialized  and 
crippled  Christendom,  then  the  dividing  walls  which 
have  arisen  in  the  course  of  time  will  hold  no  longer. 
They  shall  be  torn  asunder,  not  by  well-meaning 
strivings  for  unity,  but  by  the  Lord’s  own  might. 
And  in  its  single  great  flow,  the  flood  of  God’s  love 
shall  unite  us  all  who  are  moved  by  the  Spirit  of 
our  Lord. 


PRINTED  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 


CHURCH  AND  SUNDAY  SCHOOL  WORK 


WILLIAM  ALLEN  HARPER  President  Elen  College, 
- - - - — - - North  Carolina 

Reconstructing  the  Church 

i2mo,  net  $1.25. 

Dr.  Harper  solves  the  problems  of_federated  and 
community  churches,  industrialism  and  social  reconstruc¬ 
tion,  etc.,  along  lines  compatible  with  the  teachings  and 
spirit  of  Jesus. 

PETER  AINSLIE,  D.D.  Editor  of  "The  Christian 
—  1  - — —  Union  Quarterly ” 

If  Not  a  United  Church— What? 

The  Reinicker  Lectures  at  the  Protestant  Epis¬ 
copal  Theological  Seminary  in  Virginia.  i2mo, 
net  $1.00. 

The  first  of  a  series  of  Handbooks  presenting  the  pro¬ 
posals  of  a  United  Christendom.  Dr.  Ainslie  writes  vigor¬ 
ously,  yet  without  heat  or  partisanship,  and  presents  a 
cogent  and  lucid  plea  for  the  cause  that  must  be  answered. 

FRANK  L.  BROWN  Gen' l  Sec.  Worlds.  S.  Assoc 

■  - —  American  Section 

Plans  for  Sunday  School  Evangelism 

i2mo,  net  $1.50. 

“Here  is  a  record  of  a  successful  superintendent’s  ex¬ 
perience,  supplemented  by  unusual  opportunities  to  ob¬ 
serve  how  other  superintendents  and  pastors  won  their 
scholars  to  Christ.  If  you  buy  only  one  book  this  year — • 
let  it  be  this  one.” — S.  S .  Times. 

HOWARD  J.  GEE 

Methods  of  Church  School 
Administration 

i6mo,  net  $1.00. 

A  Text  Book  for  Community  Training  Schools  and  In¬ 
ternational  and  State  Schools  of  Sunday  School  Methods. 
Margaret  Slattery  says:.  “Practical  and  adaptable  to 
schools  of  various  sizes  in  either  city  or  country.  Will 
meet  a  long-felt  need.  I  endorse  both  plan  and  purpose 
heartily.” 

E.  C.  KNAPP  General  Secretary  Inland  Empire 

'  State  Sunday  School  Association 

The  Sunday  School  Between  Sundays 

i2mo,  net  $1.25. 

Mr.  Knapp  offers  a  large  number  of  ideas  and  sug¬ 
gestions,  all  of  which  are  practical  and  capable  of  tangi¬ 
ble  realization.  Pastors,  teachers  and  all  other  workers 
among  folk  will  find  Mr.  Knapp’s  book  of  great  interest 
and  special  value. 


BIBLE  STUDY 


P.  WHIT  WELL  WILSON 

Author  of  the  “Christ  We  Forget” 

The  Vision  We  Forget 

A  Layman’s  Reading  of 
the  Book  of  Revelation. 

$2.00 

“Certainly  this  is  the  most  en¬ 
tertaining  treatise  on  the  Revela¬ 
tion  ever  written.  Will  make  the 
Revelation  a  new  book  in  the 
reading  of  many  Christians.  _  It 
brings  the  Revelation  down  into 
the  present  day  and  makes  it  all 
intensely  vital  and  modern.” 

C.  E.  World. 


\  REVELATION  OF  THe\ 
BOOK  OF  REVELATION 

THE  VISION 
WE  FORGET 

By  r  WH1TWEU.  WILSON  t 

.  I»  lUUua  ll  W> 

4  p  *  a— .  u. 


p  •  TV  CW  0,  f-fn 


JUtW  d  -TW  CURB!  *1  FORCTT 


J.  J.  ROSS 


The  author  of 
“The  Kingdom  in  Mystery  .” 


Thinking  Through  the  New  Testament 

An  Outline  Study  of  Every  Book  In  the 
New  Testament.  $1.75 

A  course  of  study  in  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 
Dr.  Ross  has  prepared  a  volume  which  can  be  used  by 
the  individual  student  as  well  as  by  study  groups. 


FREDERIC  B.  OXTOBY 

Making  the  Bible  Real 

Introductory  Studies  in  the  Bible.  $1.0® 

In  simple,  direct  language.  Dr.  Oxtoby  brings  his 
readers  into  close,  intimate  contact  with  the  wonderful 
story  of  God’s  chosen  People,  their  Land,  their  History, 
their  Prophets  and  their  Literature. 

PHILIP  MAURO  Author  of  “ The  Number  of  Man” 

Bringing  Back  the  King 

Another  Volume  on  the  Kingdom.  $1.00 

Continuing  his  study  of  the  Kingdom,  the  author  in 
this  volume  sets  forth  the  relation  of  King  David  with 
the  Gospel. 

PHILIP  MAURO 

Our  Liberty  in  Christ 

A  Study  in  Galatians.  $1.25 

An  exposition  of  Galatians  from  the  standpoint  that 
its  main  theme  is  “the  Liberty  wherewith  Christ  has 
made  us  free.”  Special  attention  is  given  to  the  unfold¬ 
ing  of  the  remarkable  “allegory”  in  Chapter  TV. 


ABOUT  OTHER  LANDS 


a 


HENRY  CHUNG 

The  Oriental  Policy  of  the  United  States 

With  maps,  i2mo,  cloth, 

A  plea  for  the  policy  of  the  Open  Door  in  China,  pre- 
sented  by  an  oriental  scholar  of  broad  training  and  deep 
sympathies.  The  history  of  American  diplomatic  relation¬ 
ships  with  the  Orient,  the  development  of  the  various 
policies  and  influences  of  the  western  powers  in  China, 
and  the  imperilistic  aspirations  of  Japan  are  set  forth  ad¬ 
mirably. 

CHARLES  KENDALL  HARRINGTON 

Missionary  Amer.  Baptist  Foreign  Miss.  Society  to  Japan 

Captain  Bickel  of  the  Inland  Sea 

Illustrated,  8vo.,  cloth 

“Especially  valuable  at  this  hour,  because  it  throws  a 
flood  of  light  on  many  conditions  in  the  Orient  in  which 
all  students  of  religious  and  social  questions  are  espe¬ 
cially  interested.  We  would  suggest  that  pastors  generally 
retell  the  story  at  some  Sunday  evening  service,  for  here 
is  a  story  sensational,  thrilling,  informing  and  at  the  same 
time  a  story  of  great  spiritual  urgency  and  power.” — 
Watchman-Examiner, 

HARRIET  NEWELL  NOYES  Canton ,  China 

A  Light  in  the  Land  of  Sinim 

Forty-five  Years  in  the  True  Light  Seminary, 
1872-1917.  Fully  Illustrated,  8vo., 

“An  authoritative  account  of  the  work  undertaken  and 
achieved  by  the  True  Light  Seminary,  Canton,  China. 
Mrs.  Noyes  has  devoted  practically  her  whole  life  to  this 
sphere  of  Christian  service,  and  the  record  here  presented 
is  that  of  her  own  labors  and  those  associated  with  her  in 
missionary  activity  in  China,  covering  a  period  of  more 
than  forty-five  years.” — Christian  Work. 

MRS.  H.  G.  UNDERWOOD 

Underwood  of  Korea 

A  Record  of  the  Life  and  Work  of  Horace  G. 
Underwood,  D.D.  Illustrated,  cloth, 

“An  intimate  and  captivating  story  of  one  who  labored 
nobly  and  faithfully  in  Korea  for  thirty-one  years,  pre¬ 
senting  his  character,  consecration,  faith,  and  indomitable 
courage.” — Missions. 


THE  NEW  WORLD  ORDER 


HUGH  BLACK 

“Lest  We  Forget’ 9 

i2mo,  net  $1.50. 

Dr.  Black  subjects  Democracy, 
Patriotism,  State-Rights,  Re¬ 
ligion,  War,  Peace,  Pacifism  and 
the  League  of  Nations  to  a  close, 
searching  scrutiny,  indicating 
how,  by  a  just  and  sane  inter¬ 
pretation,  they  may  be  made  to 
provide  a  larger  incentive  to 
truer  living,  and  a  finer  appre¬ 
hension  of  the  duties  and  respon¬ 
sibilities  of  world-citizenship. 

RT.  REV.  CHARLES  FISKE , 


D.D.,LL.D. 


Bishop  Coadjutor  of  Central  New  York 

The  Perils  of  Respectability 

and  Other  Studies  in  Christian  Life  and  Service 
for  Reconstruction  Days.  i2mo,  net  $1.50. 

“The  approach  to  the  great  problems  of  the  day  is  con¬ 
structive,  with  the  spiritual  note  predominant.  There  is 
no  other  solution  for  the  conditions  which  face  the  world 
than  is  to  be  found  in  the  application  of  the  spirit  of 
Jesus  Christ  by  minister  and  layman  alike.  A  worthy  ad¬ 
dition  to  the  library  of  any  one  who  is  interested  in  the 
promotion  of  real,  vital  religion  in  its  application  to  the 
needs  of  modern  men.” — Reformed  Church  Messenger. 


J.  R.  SAUNDERS  Introduction  by  George  W.  Truett 

The  Cross  and  the  Reconstruction 
of  the  World 

i2rao,  net  $1.50. 

Dr.  Saunders  is  a  Christian  optimist.  He  is  not  un¬ 
mindful  of  the  unrest  to-day,  but  he  believes  that  men 
must  turn  again  with  renewed  interest  towards  the  death 
of  Christ,  and  ponder  with  impetus  its  significance  for  all 
the  race.  Having  died  with  Him,  mankind  may  hence¬ 
forth  live  unto  God,  and  find  in  this  rich  experience  the 
one  hope  for  world  reconstruction  on  a  rock  of  certainty 
which  cannot  be  moved. 

JOSEPH  JUDSON  TAYLOR ,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

The  God  of  War 

i2mo,  net  $2.00. 

An  able,  analytical  examination  of  the  place  and  power 
that  the  extolling  of  militarism  has  had  in  the  history  of 
civilization.  Having  traced  its  pernicious  path  through  the 
centuries,  the  author  turns  to  the  teachings  of  Christ,  and 
shows  by  apt  quotation  and  unanswerable  argument  that 
His  followers  cannot,  without  doing  violence  to  the  prin¬ 
ciples  of  His  gospel  advocate  militarism,  either  in  spirit 
or  practice. 


1012  01080  7784 


Date  Due 

^  6  -  3t 

-  '  i  R  3  T5.4 

il?  90.y\ 

I 

•r*  O  .A. . 

•W  f  Jj  ]  f#W 
* 

&  f 

WtHrftfJ 

> 

1®  1  pj 

— 

J  A  J 

y  MMpPPPr 

£  pjlj  { 

.:- 

&0  48 

Y-ftti.lnn 

r  ^ 

p  ’“jJtSfv 

r  - 

i.  '  * 

nr  ■  -  » 

-4  ./ ZrT 

* 

.  ^  a  •*  %A<  4 

- 

■~14. 

rr 

3*  - 

{l 

♦  9 


•!  V 


f  . 


